Blog – Weiss Ortiz P.C.

Modify Parenting Time in Illinois: Changed Circumstances Standard | Weiss Ortiz

Tue, 10 Nov 2026 04:30:59 GMT

Want to change your parenting schedule? Learn what the Illinois Supreme Court says you must show to modify parenting time or a parenting plan.

The Illinois Supreme Court recently clarified the standard for modifying parenting time. Learn the difference between showing “changed circumstances” and showing a “substantial change,” and what it means if you want to change your parenting schedule or parenting plan.

Parenting schedules that worked a few years ago do not always fit today. Work schedules change, families move, and children grow, and what a child needs at age five is not what the same child needs at age twelve. If you are thinking about asking an Illinois court to change your parenting time, one question matters from the start: how much do you have to show?

On September 24, 2026, the Illinois Supreme Court answered an important part of that question in Reynolds v. Reynolds, 2026 IL 132627. In a unanimous opinion, the court held that a parent who asks to modify parenting time only must show changed circumstances that make a modification necessary to serve the child’s best interests. The higher “substantial change” standard applies when the request is to modify a parenting plan or the allocation of parental responsibilities, such as decision-making. Because this is a Supreme Court decision, it applies to courts across Illinois, including Cook County.

Key Takeaways

Illinois law uses two different standards, depending on what you want to change.
To modify parenting time only, you must show changed circumstances that necessitate a modification to serve your child’s best interests. You do not have to show a “substantial” change.
To modify a parenting plan or decision-making responsibilities, you must show a substantial change in circumstances.
A change alone is not enough. The change has to make a modification necessary for the child’s best interests, and the judge decides.
How a request is framed matters, so it is important to know which standard applies before you file.

Parenting Time, Parenting Plans, and Parental Responsibilities: What Is the Difference?

Many people still say custody and visitation, but Illinois law now speaks of the allocation of parental responsibilities. Parental responsibilities have two parts:

Parenting time: the time a child spends with each parent.
Significant decision-making responsibilities: the authority to make major decisions for the child, such as education, health care, and religion.

A parenting plan is a written agreement that allocates decision-making, parenting time, or both. An allocation judgment is the court order that allocates parental responsibilities. If you are searching for how to change a child custody order in Illinois, these are the terms that matter.

What Did the Illinois Supreme Court Decide in Reynolds v. Reynolds?

In 2016, a McHenry County court entered an allocation judgment based on an agreement between two parents. The mother had primary parenting time and significant decision-making responsibilities. The father had a weekly overnight and every other weekend.

Years later, the father asked the court to modify the arrangement, and he eventually narrowed his request to seek only more parenting time. He pointed to changes since 2016, including remote work with a more flexible schedule, a larger home closer to the children’s school, children who were older, and relationships with half-siblings who lived in his home. A court-appointed custody evaluator recommended increasing his time.

The trial court applied the substantial change standard, decided the changes were not substantial, and ruled for the mother after the father presented his case. The appellate court vacated that ruling, and the Illinois Supreme Court agreed that the wrong standard had been used.

Why the Court Said a Different Standard Applies to Parenting Time

The court looked at the plain language of the statute, 750 ILCS 5/610.5. Subsection (a) says parenting time can be modified at any time, without a showing of serious endangerment, when changed circumstances make a modification necessary to serve the child’s best interests. Subsection (c) applies to parenting plans and allocation judgments and requires a substantial change. The court explained that the legislature deliberately treated parenting time differently.

The court also explained that whether a change was anticipated when the original order was entered matters under subsection (c), but it is not a requirement for modifying parenting time under subsection (a). The decision also resolved a disagreement among Illinois appellate courts on this question.

What Happened Next in the Case

The Supreme Court did not give the father more parenting time. It sent the case back to the trial court to decide whether the changes he presented make a modification necessary to serve the children’s best interests, using the correct standard.

Parenting Time vs. Parenting Plan: Which Standard Applies to You?

If you want to change only the parenting schedule (for example, adding time or adjusting overnights): the standard is in 750 ILCS 5/610.5(a). You must show changed circumstances that necessitate a modification to serve your child’s best interests. This request can be made at any time, and you do not need to show serious endangerment.
If you want to change decision-making responsibilities or the broader parenting plan or allocation judgment: the standard is in 750 ILCS 5/610.5(c). You must show, by a preponderance of the evidence, a substantial change in circumstances of the child or either parent, based on facts that arose after the order or that were not anticipated in it, and that the modification is necessary for the child’s best interests. A motion to change decision-making less than two years after the order generally requires the court’s permission, unless the parents agree.

Many cases involve both. In Reynolds, the father first asked for broader changes and later narrowed his request to parenting time alone. Because the standards differ, how a request is framed can affect the outcome.

Does “Changed Circumstances” Mean Any Change Will Work?

No. The law requires changes that make a modification necessary to serve the child’s best interests. Judges weigh the evidence, consider the child’s needs, and look at the credibility of the witnesses. The parent asking for the change has the burden of showing why it is needed.

In other words, the Supreme Court lowered the threshold for parenting time requests, but it did not make them automatic.

What Kinds of Changes May Matter in a Parenting Time Case?

The father in Reynolds pointed to several examples. They show the kind of facts that can be relevant, although the Supreme Court did not decide that they justified more time:

A change in work, such as moving to a remote or more flexible schedule.
A move to a home that is larger or closer to the child’s school.
The child growing older, with different needs and a changing relationship with each parent.
Relationships between the child and siblings or other family members.
The recommendation of a custody evaluator or a guardian ad litem.

Other changes parents often raise include relocation, changes in a parent’s availability, and changes in a child’s school, health, or activities. Each case turns on its own facts.

How Do You Ask an Illinois Court to Modify Parenting Time?

Decide what you want to change. Is it only the schedule, or also decision-making or other parts of the parenting plan?
Gather the facts. Write down what has changed since the current order was entered and how it affects your child.
Try to reach an agreement. If both parents agree, you can ask the court to approve an agreed order. Informal changes without a court order may not be enforceable.
File a motion to modify in the court that entered your order.
Prepare for the process. Courts often require mediation, and they may appoint a guardian ad litem or a custody evaluator, as happened in Reynolds.
Present your evidence at the hearing, focusing on your child’s best interests.

What Evidence Can Help in a Parenting Time Modification?

Records showing changes in your work schedule or availability.
School and activity schedules and how they fit with the current parenting time.
A calendar or messages showing the time each parent actually spends with the child.
Recommendations from a guardian ad litem or custody evaluator, if one is appointed.
Statements from witnesses who see you with your child.
Documentation of how your child’s needs have changed.

Frequently Asked Questions About Modifying Parenting Time in Illinois. Can I modify parenting time at any time in Illinois?

Parenting time can be modified at any time if you show changed circumstances that necessitate a modification to serve your child’s best interests, and you do not need to show serious endangerment. Requests to change decision-making responsibilities have separate rules, including a two-year timing rule.

Do I need a substantial change to modify parenting time?

No. After Reynolds, a request to modify parenting time alone requires changed circumstances, not a substantial change. A substantial change is required to modify a parenting plan or allocation judgment, such as decision-making.

Does this mean I will get more parenting time?

No. The decision sets the standard, but a judge still decides whether the changes make a modification necessary for your child’s best interests.

Does the decision apply in Cook County?

Yes. Illinois Supreme Court decisions apply to courts throughout the state, including Cook County.

Can we change parenting time without going to court?

Parents can agree to a change and ask the court to approve it. Informal arrangements that are not approved by the court may not be enforceable.

Do I need a lawyer to modify parenting time?

You are not required to hire one, but the standards, deadlines, and evidence involved can be complicated. A family law attorney can help you understand which standard applies and how to present your case.

Thinking About an Illinois Parenting Plan Modification? Talk to a Family Law Attorney

The Reynolds decision clarifies what a parent must show to change parenting time, but every family’s situation is different. Before you file, it helps to know which standard applies to your request and what evidence will matter.

Weiss Ortiz Attorneys & Mediators serves clients throughout Cook County, Illinois, including Chicago, La Grange Park, Oak Brook, and Deerfield.

Weiss Ortiz Attorneys & Mediators

Cook County, Illinois | Chicago | La Grange Park | Oak Brook | Deerfield
Free consultations: 773-498-4498
Website: weissortizlaw.com

Attorney Advertising. Legal Disclaimer: This article is provided for informational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice. Laws may change, and their application depends on the specific facts of each situation. The Reynolds decision established the legal standard and sent the case back to the trial court; it did not decide whether the parent would receive additional parenting time. Reading this article does not create an attorney-client relationship. Past results do not guarantee a similar outcome.

Construction Accident Lawyer Illinois: Workplace Fall Injuries | Weiss Ortiz

Sat, 07 Nov 2026 02:38:52 GMT

Hurt in a fall at work? Learn how premises liability, third-party claims, and workers’ compensation work together in Illinois construction accidents.

A recent Illinois appellate decision about a fall through an unprotected skylight shows why construction and workplace fall injuries can involve more than one responsible party. Learn how premises liability, third-party claims, and workers’ compensation fit together.

When a worker is hurt in a fall on a job site, many people assume that workers’ compensation is the only path. In Illinois, that is often only part of the picture. Property owners, general contractors, subcontractors, and other third parties can also owe duties of care, and when they fail to meet them, an injured worker may have additional options.

On October 14, 2026, the Illinois Appellate Court, Second District, issued its decision in Kraeplin v. John B. Sanfilippo & Son, Inc., 2026 IL App (2d) 250495, a case about a worker who fell through a skylight on a factory roof. The court found that, under the circumstances, reasonable care required the property owner to warn about the unprotected skylight. The ruling is a useful example of how premises liability connects workplace safety with property owner responsibility.

Key Takeaways

Workplace fall injuries often involve more than your employer. Property owners and other third parties may share responsibility.
In Illinois, workers’ compensation generally prevents a lawsuit against your own employer, but it does not prevent a claim against a negligent third party.
Under premises liability law, a property owner may have a duty to warn about dangerous conditions, including unprotected skylights and roof openings.
An “open and obvious” defense does not automatically end a case. The facts of each accident decide the outcome.
Evidence disappears quickly after a construction accident, and deadlines apply. Acting early protects your rights.

Why Falls Through Skylights and Roof Openings Are So Dangerous

A skylight can look like part of the roof when you are standing on it. Dust, weather, or roofing material can hide it, and it is not designed to hold a person’s weight. A step onto the wrong surface can mean a fall to the floor below.

Falls from roofs and other heights can cause catastrophic injuries, including broken bones, spinal cord injuries, and traumatic brain injuries. These injuries often lead to long recoveries, lost income, and permanent limitations, which is why it matters to understand every source of compensation that may be available.

What Happened in Kraeplin v. John B. Sanfilippo & Son?

According to the published opinion, the owner of a factory had hired a roofing contractor to work on its roof. A worker fell through a skylight and was injured. The skylight had no fall protection, including no protective screen beneath it.

The roofing company trained its employees about fall hazards, and its crews used full fall protection on roofing jobs. Testimony in the case indicated that the owner never told the roofing crew that this skylight was unprotected, and that a supervisor would have directed workers to use fall protection had he known.

The owner argued that the skylight was an open and obvious condition and that it owed the worker no duty to protect or warn him. A lower court sided with the owner. The Second District reversed and sent the case back.

Why the Court Focused on a Duty to Warn

The court examined whether reasonable care required the owner to warn about the danger. It pointed out that the owner could have met its obligation simply by telling the roofing crew that the skylight was unprotected, a small burden compared with the risk of a fall through the roof.

What This Decision Does and Does Not Mean

The ruling does not decide who wins the case. Because it was sent back to the lower court, the dispute continues. It also applies the law to its own facts, and it comes from the Second District, so other courts may view different facts differently.

What it does show is that, in Illinois, calling a hazard open and obvious is not always the end of the discussion, especially when the owner knew about a danger that workers on the job may not have known about.

Can You Sue Someone Other Than Your Employer After a Workplace Fall?

Often, yes. Under the Illinois Workers’ Compensation Act, 820 ILCS 305/5(a), an injured worker generally cannot sue their own employer for negligence in exchange for receiving no-fault benefits. But 820 ILCS 305/5(b) allows an injured worker to bring a claim against a third party whose negligence caused the injury.

Collecting workers’ compensation benefits does not stop you from pursuing a third-party claim. However, your employer or its insurer may have a lien on part of a third-party recovery, so the two tracks need to be coordinated carefully.

Who Can Be Responsible for a Construction or Workplace Fall?

Responsibility depends on who controlled the site, the work, and the dangerous condition. Depending on the facts, possible responsible parties include:

Property owners or managers, if they knew or should have known about a dangerous condition and failed to warn or fix it.
General contractors, if they controlled site safety or coordinated the work.
Subcontractors, if their work created or left the hazard.
Equipment or safety product manufacturers, if a defective product contributed to the fall.

Identifying every responsible party early matters, because each one may have insurance coverage and different legal duties.

What Is Premises Liability in Illinois?

Premises liability is the area of law that holds property owners and occupiers responsible when dangerous conditions on their property injure someone. Under the Illinois Premises Liability Act, 740 ILCS 130/2, owners and occupiers generally owe a duty of reasonable care to people lawfully on the property.

In a construction or roofing setting, that can include warning contractors and their workers about hazards the owner knows about, such as an unguarded skylight, a weak roof surface, or an open hole.

What Evidence Matters in a Construction Fall Case?

Strong evidence can make a major difference. It may include:

Photos and videos of the area where you fell, taken as soon as possible.
The incident report and any communications about the accident.
Contracts, work orders, and emails showing who hired whom and who knew about roof conditions.
Safety plans, training records, and fall protection records.
Witness names and statements.
Medical records and bills.
Records of inspections or safety complaints, including any OSHA records.

Safety standards, including OSHA fall protection rules, can also be relevant to what reasonable care required in a particular situation.

How Long Do You Have to File a Claim?

A third-party personal injury lawsuit in Illinois generally must be filed within two years of the injury under 735 ILCS 5/13-202. Workers’ compensation claims have their own separate deadlines, including a short window to notify your employer about the accident, so report your injury right away.

Surveillance footage can be erased and job sites change quickly, so waiting can cost you both your rights and your proof.

What Should You Do After a Fall at a Construction Site or Workplace?

Get medical care. Your health comes first, and medical records document your injuries.
Report the accident. Tell your employer or supervisor right away and make sure it is documented.
Document the scene. Take photos and videos of the hazard and the surrounding area, if it is safe to do so.
Collect witness information. Names and phone numbers can be valuable later.
Be careful with insurance companies. Avoid giving a recorded statement or signing anything before getting legal advice.
Keep your records together. Save medical bills, pay records, and any paperwork connected to the job.
Speak with a construction accident lawyer. A lawyer can review who may be responsible and how workers’ compensation and third-party claims fit together.

Frequently Asked Questions About Construction Accidents in Illinois. Can I file a claim if I was hurt in a fall at a construction site in Illinois?

Yes, in many cases. You may be able to receive workers’ compensation benefits and, depending on the facts, bring a separate claim against a third party whose negligence contributed to your fall.

Can I sue my employer for a workplace fall injury?

Generally, no. Workers’ compensation is usually the exclusive remedy against your own employer in Illinois, but it does not prevent claims against other responsible parties.

Who besides my employer can be responsible for a workplace fall?

Property owners, general contractors, subcontractors, property managers, and product manufacturers can all be responsible, depending on who controlled the site and the hazard.

What is a duty to warn?

It is an obligation to tell people about a danger the owner knows about, or should know about, when they may not be aware of it. Whether the duty applies depends on the facts of the case.

Does an open and obvious hazard end my claim?

Not automatically. Illinois courts weigh the specific facts, as the Kraeplin decision shows.

How long do I have to file?

Generally two years for a third-party personal injury lawsuit, and separate, shorter notice requirements apply to workers’ compensation claims.

Do I need a lawyer?

You are not required to hire one, but construction accident cases often involve several parties, insurance companies, and liens. Talking to a lawyer early can help you understand your options.

Injured in a Construction Accident in Illinois? Talk to a Construction Accident Lawyer

The Kraeplin decision shows that workplace fall injuries are rarely as simple as they look. Who controlled the site, who knew about the danger, and who failed to warn can all change who may be responsible. Before you assume workers’ compensation is your only option, have someone review the facts.

Weiss Ortiz Attorneys & Mediators serves clients throughout Cook County, Illinois, including Chicago, La Grange Park, Oak Brook, and Deerfield.

Weiss Ortiz Attorneys & Mediators

Cook County, Illinois | Chicago | La Grange Park | Oak Brook | Deerfield
Free consultations: 773-498-4498
Website: weissortizlaw.com

Attorney Advertising. Legal Disclaimer: This article is provided for informational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice. Laws may change, and their application depends on the specific facts of each situation. The Kraeplin decision was issued by the Second District Appellate Court, reversed a lower court ruling, and sent the case back for further proceedings; it applies the law to its own facts. Reading this article does not create an attorney-client relationship. Past results do not guarantee a similar outcome.

Open and Obvious Hazard in Illinois: Slip and Fall Claims | Weiss Ortiz

Thu, 05 Nov 2026 01:42:58 GMT

Fell over a hazard you could see? Learn how Illinois courts apply the open and obvious rule, when exceptions apply, and what to do after a slip and fall.

A r ecent Illinois appellate decision shows how courts treat hazards that are easy to see. Learn what the “open and obvious” rule means for a slip and fall claim, when exceptions may apply, and why the details of your accident matter.

After a fall, many people blame themselves right away: “I saw it, so it’s my fault.” In Illinois, the law is more nuanced than that. Property owners owe visitors a duty of reasonable care, but they are generally not required to protect people from dangers that are open and obvious. That does not mean every visible hazard ends a claim. It means the specific facts of your fall carry enormous weight.

On October 16, 2026, the Illinois Appellate Court, Second District, decided Stout v. Costco Wholesale Corp., 2026 IL App (2d) 250335, a premises liability case about a tripping hazard at a gas station. The ruling is a useful reminder of why every slip and fall accident in Illinois has to be analyzed on its own circumstances.

Key Takeaways

Illinois property owners are generally not responsible for dangers that a reasonable person would notice and avoid.
An open and obvious hazard is not an automatic bar to a claim. Courts still weigh whether the owner owed a duty.
Exceptions, such as the distraction exception and the deliberate encounter exception, can apply, but only when the facts support them.
Evidence, timing, and the arguments raised early in a case can decide the outcome.
Illinois generally gives you two years to file a personal injury lawsuit, so waiting can cost you your claim.

What Does “Open and Obvious” Mean in Illinois?

Under Illinois law, a condition is open and obvious when both the danger itself and the risk it creates would be apparent to a reasonable person in the same position, using ordinary perception, intelligence, and judgment.

The thinking behind the rule is simple. When a hazard is plainly visible, people are expected to notice it and take care, so the chance that someone will be hurt is considered slight. A clearly visible object in the middle of a walkway is a common example.

The question is not whether the hazard was visible to the owner or to a lawyer reviewing photos afterward. It is whether a reasonable person in your position, at that moment, would have recognized the condition and the danger that came with it.

Does an Open and Obvious Hazard Automatically End a Slip and Fall Case?

No. Illinois courts do not treat “open and obvious” as an automatic win for the property owner. Even when a condition is obvious, the court still looks at whether the owner owed a duty of care under the specific facts.

That duty analysis considers four things:

How foreseeable the injury was.
How likely the injury was to happen.
How burdensome it would be to guard against the injury.
What the consequences would be of placing that burden on the owner.

When a hazard is obvious, the first two factors usually carry little weight, because people are expected to be careful. That is why the burden on the owner often becomes the deciding point.

Whether a condition is open and obvious can also be a question of fact. If the parties disagree about what the hazard looked like, a judge may decide a jury should answer it.

What Happened in Stout v. Costco?

In March 2022, a woman was refueling her husband’s pickup truck at a Costco gas station in Mettawa, in Lake County. The fuel port was on the driver’s side, right next to the pump, so the hose hung in a U shape between the truck and the pump.

It was a rainy day and the hose was wet. She decided to step over it to tell her husband the price of the gas. She cleared the hose with her right foot, but her left foot caught on it and she fell, suffering significant injuries.

She sued Costco for negligence, claiming, among other things, that the hose’s retraction device was broken and that the store failed to inspect the hose or warn customers. The trial court granted summary judgment for Costco, and the Second District affirmed.

Why the Court Ruled the Hose Was Open and Obvious

The appellate court concluded that the hose was open and obvious as a matter of law. Several facts mattered:

She had placed the nozzle in her own vehicle and started pumping, so she knew the hose was there.
She had used that gas station before.
Nobody disputed that the hose was visible.
A short surveillance video showed her lifting her foot high to step over it, which the court saw as proof that she understood it was an obstacle and a tripping risk.

The court then ran the duty analysis anyway. Because the danger was obvious, an injury was not very foreseeable or likely. Meanwhile, protecting customers from this kind of hazard would have meant assigning staff to watch customers at the pumps, a heavy burden across every Costco location with a fuel station. Weighing those factors, the court found Costco owed no duty in this case.

Why the Exceptions Did Not Save the Claim

Illinois recognizes exceptions to the open and obvious rule. The injured woman argued two of them, and both failed on these facts.

The Distraction Exception

This exception can apply when the owner has reason to expect that a visitor’s attention will be diverted, so the visitor may not notice the hazard, may forget about it, or may fail to protect themselves. There must be evidence that the person was actually distracted, and the distraction must have been reasonably foreseeable to the owner.

In Stout, the woman said she was worried about getting a wet, dirty hose on her clothes. The court viewed this as a distraction she created herself, and noted that stepping over the hose actually brought her closer to the very thing she wanted to avoid. It held that the owner could not reasonably foresee that behavior.

The Deliberate Encounter Exception

This exception can apply when an owner should expect that people will knowingly face a danger because the benefits outweigh the risk, for example when there is no practical alternative.

The court rejected it for two reasons. First, the argument was not raised in the trial court, so it was forfeited on appeal. Second, even if it had been raised, she could have simply walked around the truck. That path would have been only a minor inconvenience, and nothing outside her own choices pushed her to step over the hose.

The lesson for injured people is clear: the right legal arguments need to be raised at the right time.

What Facts Can Change the Outcome of an Illinois Slip and Fall Case?

The Stout decision turned on very specific facts: the woman herself created the obstacle, saw it, and showed on video that she understood it. Other Illinois cases have gone differently when the facts were different. Details that can matter include:

Visibility: Was the hazard hard to see because of poor lighting, weather, or a lack of contrast with the surrounding surface?
Size and type of the defect: A small or camouflaged defect may not be obvious to someone walking toward it.
What you were doing: Were you carrying merchandise, following instructions, or completing a task the property owner created?
Other dangers nearby: Were you watching for traffic, falling debris, or another risk?
Alternatives: Was there a safe, reasonable path around the hazard?
Who was injured: Courts consider that a young child may not appreciate a danger the way an adult would.
Evidence: Photos, surveillance video, witness statements, incident reports, and maintenance records can make or break a claim.
What the owner knew: Did the owner know, or should the owner have known, about the dangerous condition?

What If You Were Partly at Fault for Your Fall?

Illinois follows a modified comparative fault rule. Under 735 ILCS 5/2-1116, your compensation is reduced by your percentage of fault. If you are found to be more than 50 percent responsible for your own injury, you cannot recover damages at all.

This is why insurance companies often argue that “you should have seen it.” A careful review of the facts can help show how responsibility should really be shared.

How Long Do You Have to File a Slip and Fall Claim in Illinois?

In most cases, you have two years from the date of the injury to file a personal injury lawsuit in Illinois under 735 ILCS 5/13-202. If the property belongs to a government entity, shorter deadlines or special notice requirements may apply.

Evidence also disappears quickly. Surveillance footage can be overwritten, and conditions at the scene can change within days. Acting early protects both your rights and your proof.

What Should You Do After a Slip and Fall in Illinois?

Get medical care. Your health comes first, and medical records document your injuries.
Report the fall. Tell the manager or property owner and ask for a copy of any incident report.
Document the scene. Take photos and videos of the hazard, the surrounding area, the lighting, and the weather conditions.
Collect witness information. Names and phone numbers can be valuable later.
Keep your shoes and clothing. Do not clean or discard them.
Be careful with insurance companies. Avoid giving a recorded statement or signing anything before getting legal advice.
Keep your records together. Save medical bills, work-related documents, and anything else tied to the fall.
Speak with a slip and fall lawyer. A lawyer can review how the open and obvious rule and its exceptions apply to your situation before important deadlines pass.

Frequently Asked Questions About Slip and Fall Claims in Illinois Can I still file a slip and fall claim in Illinois if the hazard was visible?

Possibly. An open and obvious hazard can seriously weaken a claim, but it is not an automatic bar. The outcome depends on the facts, the duty analysis, and whether an exception applies.

What is the open and obvious rule in Illinois?

It is a rule that generally relieves property owners of responsibility for dangers that a reasonable person would notice and avoid.

What is the distraction exception?

It is an exception that may apply when the owner should have expected a visitor’s attention to be drawn away from an obvious hazard, and the person was actually distracted.

What if I was partly responsible for my fall?

You may still recover compensation if you are not more than 50 percent at fault, although your award will be reduced by your share of responsibility.

How long do I have to sue after a fall in Illinois?

Generally two years from the date of the injury, with shorter deadlines possible when a government entity is involved.

Do I need a lawyer for a slip and fall case?

You are not required to hire one, but premises liability cases can turn on technical rules and early evidence. Speaking with a lawyer early can help you understand your options.

Injured in a Fall in Illinois? Talk to a Slip and Fall Lawyer

The Stout decision shows that no two falls are alike. Where it happened, what you could see, what you were doing, and what the owner should have expected can all change the result. Before you assume you do not have a case, have someone review the facts.

Weiss Ortiz Attorneys & Mediators serves clients throughout Cook County, Illinois, including Chicago, La Grange Park, Oak Brook, and Deerfield.

Weiss Ortiz Attorneys & Mediators Cook County, Illinois | Chicago | La Grange Park | Oak Brook | Deerfield Free consultations: 773-498-4498 Website: weissortizlaw.com

Attorney Advertising. Legal Disclaimer: This article is provided for informational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice. Laws may change, and their application depends on the specific facts of each situation. The Stout decision was issued by the Second District Appellate Court and applies the law to its own facts; other courts may view different facts differently. Reading this article does not create an attorney-client relationship. Past results do not guarantee a similar outcome.

Illinois Rental Fee Transparency Law: What Landlords Need to Know for 2027

Wed, 28 Oct 2026 22:42:33 GMT

Illinois’ new rental fee transparency law takes effect January 1, 2027. Learn which fees landlords must disclose, which charges are prohibited, and how to prepare.

Starting January 1, 2027, a new Illinois law will change how residential landlords disclose rental fees and charge tenants for certain services. Under Public Act 104-0479, landlords covered by the law must disclose mandatory rental fees more clearly and comply with new restrictions on application fees, maintenance charges, and other costs associated with renting a home.

For landlords and residential property managers, these changes make it important to review lease agreements, rental listings, application procedures, and existing fee policies before the effective date.

Understanding the new requirements can help property owners prepare for the transition, improve transparency with prospective tenants, and reduce the risk of disputes over rental charges.

What Is Illinois’ New Rental Fee Transparency Law?

Illinois’ new rental fee transparency law was enacted through House Bill 3564 and is codified in Section 35 of the Illinois Landlord and Tenant Act, 765 ILCS 705/35.

The law is designed to make the cost of renting a residential property clearer before a tenant enters into a lease. It requires landlords to disclose non-optional fees and whether utilities are included in the rent. It also prohibits certain fees that landlords might otherwise charge during the application process or tenancy.

The law takes effect on January 1, 2027 , and generally applies to residential lease agreements entered into on or after that date, subject to the statutory exception for certain owner-occupied properties.

Landlords should review the official text of 765 ILCS 705/35 before updating their rental policies.

Which Rental Fees Must Illinois Landlords Disclose?

One of the central requirements of the new law is the disclosure of all non-optional rental fees, whether they are charged once or on a recurring basis.

These disclosures must appear in two places:

Rental listings: Mandatory fees must be disclosed clearly and conspicuously in the property listing or through an accompanying link provided at the time of the listing.
The first page of the lease: All non-optional fees must be explicitly listed on the first page of the residential lease agreement.

The law also requires landlords to disclose whether utilities are included in the rent in the listing or lease disclosure.

For example, if a tenant is required to pay a monthly administrative fee, the landlord should ensure that the fee is disclosed in the required manner rather than introducing it unexpectedly after the tenant has reviewed the advertised rental price.

The purpose is to help prospective tenants understand the mandatory costs associated with renting a property before committing to a lease.

What Happens if a Mandatory Fee Is Missing From the Lease?

For covered leases, a tenant is not liable for a non-optional fee that is not explicitly included on the first page of the lease.

This makes lease preparation particularly important. Landlords should review their current templates to ensure that mandatory charges are identified clearly and appear in the required location.

Simply mentioning a fee elsewhere in a lengthy agreement may not satisfy the specific first-page disclosure requirement.

Which Rental Fees Will Be Prohibited Under the New Law?

Section 35 also prohibits landlords from requiring tenants to pay certain fees or fines. These restrictions address charges associated with applications, maintenance, lease changes, and other routine aspects of renting a property.

1. Excessive Rental Application and Screening Fees

The law generally prohibits rental application fees exceeding $50, including fees for background checks.

An exception allows a landlord to charge more than $50 for a third-party background check when the actual third-party service costs more than $50. In that situation, the landlord must pay the cost upfront and bill the applicant within 14 days, providing receipts from the third-party provider.

If the landlord fails to provide the bill and receipts within that period, the fee is waived. The law also restricts using this fee as the basis for an eviction action during the first year of a lease.

Landlords should therefore review their screening procedures, invoices, and administrative charges to ensure that fees comply with the statutory requirements.

2. Lease Modification and Renewal Fees

The law prohibits fees or fines charged for modifying or renewing a residential lease agreement.

Property managers should review their renewal procedures and avoid automatically carrying forward charges that are prohibited under the new requirements.

3. Fees for Maintenance Requests

Landlords may not charge tenants fees or fines for certain maintenance-related activities, including:

Requesting maintenance service after normal business hours.
Contacting the property owner or manager about maintenance, service requests, or lease-related questions.
Travel required to perform necessary maintenance or safety repairs.
Calling a maintenance hotline for maintenance requests, lease questions, or other matters directly related to the tenancy.
Routine maintenance and upkeep of the rental unit.

These restrictions mean landlords should examine whether their current fee schedules impose separate charges for ordinary maintenance communications or necessary repair work.

4. Pest Control Charges in Certain Circumstances

The law prohibits fees or fines for pest abatement or removal when the tenant has not contributed to the infestation.

Because the restriction depends on the circumstances of the infestation, landlords should evaluate the facts before assigning responsibility for pest-related costs.

5. Certain Eviction-Related Fees

The law prohibits fees or fines for an eviction notice or for filing an eviction action before a court grants an eviction order.

However, the statute does not eliminate a landlord’s ability to recover court costs and filing fees as permitted by law.

Landlords should distinguish between prohibited charges imposed on tenants and court-related costs that may still be recoverable.

6. Move-In and Move-Out Walkthrough Fees

The law also prohibits fees or fines for an in-person walkthrough of a residential unit at move-in or move-out.

Property managers should review any inspection-related charges in their current policies to determine whether they are consistent with the new law.

Does the Law Apply to Every Residential Rental Property in Illinois?

Not every rental arrangement is covered in the same way.

The law generally applies to residential lease agreements entered into after January 1, 2027. It contains an exception for lease agreements involving dwelling units in owner-occupied premises containing six units or fewer .

Landlords should evaluate whether their property and lease arrangement fall within the statutory exception rather than assuming that all residential properties are treated identically.

Local rules also matter. Municipalities and counties may regulate tenant fees, but local regulations must provide restrictions at least as protective as those established by the state law.

Property owners and managers should therefore review both Illinois law and any applicable local requirements before finalizing their rental policies.

Can Landlords Avoid the Restrictions by Renaming a Fee?

No. The law expressly provides that a landlord may not rename a fee or charge to avoid the requirements of the statute.

For example, changing the label of a prohibited maintenance charge does not necessarily make the charge permissible. The substance of the fee and the service it covers remain important.

Landlords should review not only the names of their charges but also their actual purpose, how they are calculated, and when they are imposed.

A careful review can help identify policies that may need to be revised before the new requirements take effect.

What Can Happen if a Landlord Violates the Rental Fee Transparency Law?

The law allows a person alleging a violation to bring a civil action in a court with appropriate jurisdiction.

Depending on the circumstances and the applicable law, a court may order injunctive relief, monetary relief, attorney’s fees, and costs.

A dispute may arise when a tenant challenges a fee that was not properly disclosed or alleges that a prohibited charge was imposed. Clear lease language, consistent fee schedules, and accurate records can be important when evaluating these disputes.

Landlords should not assume that including a general fee provision in a lease will automatically make every charge enforceable.

How Should Illinois Landlords Prepare Before January 1, 2027?

Property owners and residential property managers can begin preparing by reviewing the documents and procedures they use throughout the rental process.

Consider the following steps:

1. Review rental advertisements. Confirm that all non-optional fees are disclosed clearly and conspicuously in the listing or an accompanying link, as required by law.

2. Update lease templates. Ensure all mandatory one-time and recurring fees are explicitly included on the first page of covered residential lease agreements.

3. Clarify utility arrangements. Review how rental listings and leases explain whether utilities are included in the advertised rent.

4. Audit application fees. Check screening costs, third-party invoices, billing deadlines, and supporting receipts.

5. Review maintenance and administrative charges. Identify fees related to after-hours requests, routine upkeep, maintenance calls, lease renewals, inspections, and other activities addressed by the statute.

6. Train property management staff. Make sure employees and third-party managers understand the updated requirements and apply them consistently.

7. Review local requirements. Check whether additional municipal or county rules apply to the property.

8. Seek clarification when necessary. If a particular fee or lease provision raises questions, obtain a legal review before continuing to use it.

Taking these steps ahead of the effective date can give landlords time to identify potential issues and make appropriate changes.

Frequently Asked Questions About Illinois Rental Fee Transparency, when does Illinois’ new rental fee transparency law take effect?

The law takes effect January 1, 2027. It generally applies to covered residential lease agreements entered into on or after that date.

Must all mandatory rental fees appear on the first page of the lease?

Yes. For covered leases, all non-optional fees, whether one-time or recurring, must be explicitly listed on the first page. The fees must also be disclosed clearly in the rental listing or through an accompanying link at the time of listing.

Are rental application fees capped at $50?

Generally, yes. An exception applies when the actual cost of a third-party background check exceeds $50 and the landlord satisfies the statutory requirements for upfront payment, billing within 14 days, and providing receipts.

Can a landlord charge a tenant for an after-hours maintenance request?

The new law prohibits fees or fines for after-hours maintenance requests, as well as several other charges connected with maintenance and routine upkeep.

Does the law prohibit every move-in fee or security deposit?

No. The final law should not be interpreted as a blanket prohibition on all move-in fees or security deposits. Landlords must evaluate each charge under the applicable statutory provisions and other relevant laws.

What should a landlord do if a fee is not clearly addressed by the law?

The landlord should review the statutory language, consider any applicable local rules, and seek legal guidance before imposing the charge.

Need Guidance on a Residential Lease or Rental Fee Dispute in Illinois?

Changes to Illinois landlord-tenant law can affect lease agreements, rental listings, property management policies, and disputes over charges. Reviewing the applicable requirements before a new lease is signed may help identify potential compliance issues and clarify the parties’ rights and obligations.

Weiss Ortiz Attorneys & Mediators serves clients throughout Cook County, Illinois, including Chicago, La Grange Park, Oak Brook, and Deerfield.

To learn more about the firm or discuss a legal concern, contact the office:

Weiss Ortiz Attorneys & Mediators
Cook County, Illinois | Chicago | La Grange Park | Oak Brook | Deerfield
Phone: 773-498-4498
Website: weissortizlaw.com

Legal Disclaimer: This article is provided for informational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice. Laws may change, and their application depends on the specific facts of each situation. Reading this article does not create an attorney-client relationship.

Can Living With a New Partner Affect Spousal Maintenance in Illinois? | Weiss Ortiz

Thu, 15 Oct 2026 03:30:32 GMT

Learn how living with a new partner may affect spousal maintenance in Illinois, what courts consider cohabitation, and when maintenance may be terminated.

After a divorce, life circumstances can change. A person receiving spousal maintenance may begin a new relationship, spend more time with a partner, or eventually move in with someone new. These changes can raise important legal questions: Can living with a new partner affect spousal maintenance in Illinois? Could an ex-spouse seek to end maintenance payments because of a new relationship?

Under Illinois law, living with a new partner can affect spousal maintenance, but dating someone or sharing a home does not automatically mean maintenance will end . The law focuses on whether the recipient is cohabiting with another person on a “resident, continuing conjugal basis,” subject to any applicable written agreement or court-approved terms.

Understanding how this rule works can help both the person paying maintenance and the person receiving it make informed decisions about their legal rights and responsibilities.

What Is Spousal Maintenance in Illinois?

Spousal maintenance, sometimes called alimony, is financial support that one former spouse may be ordered to pay to the other after a divorce.

Depending on the circumstances, a maintenance award may help address differences in income, earning capacity, financial resources, or other factors considered by the court. The terms of an award can vary from one divorce case to another.

A maintenance order or marital settlement agreement may also address when payments end, whether the award can be modified, and what happens if either former spouse’s circumstances change.

Because these terms matter, it is important to review the actual divorce judgment and any applicable agreement before assuming that a new relationship changes a maintenance obligation.

What Does Illinois Law Say About Living With a New Partner?

Section 510(c) of the Illinois Marriage and Dissolution of Marriage Act generally provides that future spousal maintenance terminates if the person receiving it cohabits with another person on a resident, continuing conjugal basis , unless the parties have agreed otherwise in a qualifying written agreement or the court has otherwise approved.

This standard means that a new romantic relationship does not necessarily end maintenance. The circumstances of the relationship matter, including whether it resembles an ongoing, marriage-like partnership rather than a dating relationship alone.

Courts examine the evidence as a whole. There is no single fact that automatically determines whether a relationship meets the legal standard.

Does Dating Someone Affect Spousal Maintenance?

Dating, being in a committed relationship, or spending time with a new partner does not automatically terminate spousal maintenance under Illinois law.

For example, a person may have a romantic partner but continue to maintain a separate home and keep their finances and day-to-day responsibilities independent. Those facts may be relevant when determining whether the relationship meets the statutory standard.

However, courts look beyond labels. Calling someone a boyfriend or girlfriend does not resolve the legal question if the evidence suggests that the relationship functions like a marriage.

The key issue is whether the recipient’s relationship with the new partner meets the applicable legal standard, not simply whether the person has started dating again.

What Factors Do Illinois Courts Consider?

When deciding whether a relationship qualifies as cohabitation on a resident, continuing conjugal basis, Illinois courts may consider several aspects of the couple’s life together.

These factors can include:

Length of the relationship: How long the relationship has existed.
Time spent together: How frequently the couple sees one another and whether they regularly live together.
Shared activities: Whether they engage in everyday activities as a couple.
Financial and personal arrangements: Whether their financial affairs, household responsibilities, or other personal matters are interconnected.
Travel and holidays: Whether they take vacations together or regularly spend holidays as a couple.
The overall nature of the relationship: Whether the evidence indicates a continuing, marriage-like partnership.

These are examples, not a rigid checklist. Courts may weigh the evidence differently depending on the circumstances of each case. Illinois appellate decisions have identified these and other considerations when evaluating alleged cohabitation.

Does the Couple Have to Live Together for Spousal Maintenance to End?

Living arrangements are an important part of determining whether a new relationship may affect spousal maintenance in Illinois. Under Section 510(c) of the Illinois Marriage and Dissolution of Marriage Act, the relationship must meet the applicable standard for cohabitation on a resident, continuing conjugal basis.

In In re Marriage of Culm (2025), an Illinois appellate court affirmed the denial of a request to terminate maintenance where the couple had a long-term relationship, spent nights together, and traveled together but maintained separate residences and had never lived together or planned to do so.

This decision illustrates why dating, frequent overnight visits, or a long-term romantic relationship does not automatically establish qualifying cohabitation. Courts evaluate the specific evidence and the nature of the relationship under Illinois law.

Because the outcome depends on the facts and applicable legal standards, anyone concerned about a new partner's effect on spousal maintenance should seek advice about their particular circumstances.

What Happens to Spousal Maintenance if Cohabitation Is Established?

Under Section 510(c), the obligation to pay future maintenance generally terminates when the recipient begins qualifying cohabitation, unless an applicable written agreement or court-approved arrangement provides otherwise. The statute also addresses the effective date of termination and potential reimbursement of maintenance paid from that date.

Disputes can arise when former spouses disagree about whether the relationship qualifies or when the cohabitation began. In those circumstances, evidence and the terms of the existing divorce judgment or agreement can become especially important.

Because the financial consequences can be significant, a person should not assume that an allegation alone establishes that maintenance has ended. Legal guidance can help clarify how the statute and the applicable court documents affect the situation.

Who Has to Prove That a Former Spouse Is Cohabiting?

Generally, the party seeking termination of spousal maintenance based on alleged cohabitation must present evidence supporting that claim. Illinois case law describes the required showing as evidence of a de facto marriage-like relationship. The precise evidentiary analysis depends on the case and the applicable precedent.

Evidence may include information about living arrangements, shared household expenses, financial connections, travel, or other aspects of the couple’s life together. Any evidence should be gathered and handled lawfully.

A court evaluates the evidence rather than relying solely on suspicion, assumptions, or the existence of a new romantic relationship.

Can Spousal Maintenance Be Modified for Other Reasons?

Yes. Apart from the specific cohabitation rule, Illinois law allows certain maintenance orders to be modified when the applicable legal requirements are met. Section 510 addresses modification and termination, while the terms of the divorce judgment or settlement agreement may affect what changes are permitted.

A change in income, employment, financial circumstances, or other relevant conditions may raise a separate question about modification. Whether a modification is available depends on the governing order, any agreement between the parties, and the facts of the case.

Termination based on qualifying cohabitation and modification based on changed circumstances are distinct legal issues. It is important to understand which rule applies before taking action.

What Should You Do if a New Relationship May Affect Maintenance?

Whether you pay or receive spousal maintenance, consider taking the following steps if a new relationship raises questions about an existing order.

Review the divorce judgment and agreement. Check the provisions governing maintenance, termination, and modification.
Keep relevant records. Financial documents and other lawful evidence may help clarify the circumstances.
Avoid making assumptions. Dating, staying overnight, and qualifying cohabitation are not necessarily the same thing under Illinois law.
Get legal advice before changing payments. Stopping or withholding payments without understanding the applicable order and law can create additional disputes.
Address disagreements through the appropriate legal process. If the parties dispute whether maintenance should end, legal guidance can help identify the available options.

The right next step depends on the facts and the language of the applicable court order or agreement.

How Can a Family Law Attorney Help?

Questions about spousal maintenance and a former spouse’s new relationship can involve complicated factual and legal issues. A family law attorney can review the divorce judgment, explain the applicable Illinois law, assess relevant evidence, and help you understand your options.

Whether you are concerned that a new partner may affect the maintenance you receive or believe that payments should end because of qualifying cohabitation, getting advice tailored to your circumstances can help you make informed decisions.

Speak With Weiss Ortiz Attorneys & Mediators

If you have questions about spousal maintenance, cohabitation, or a possible change to an existing divorce order, Weiss Ortiz Attorneys & Mediators can help you understand your options under Illinois law.

Our firm serves Cook County, Illinois , including Chicago, La Grange Park, Oak Brook, and Deerfield. Contact our team to discuss your family law concerns and learn what steps may be available for your situation.

Free consultations: 773-498-4498
Website: weissortizlaw.com

Disclaimer: This article is for informational purposes only and is not legal advice. Reading this article does not create an attorney-client relationship. The outcome of any legal matter depends on its specific facts and applicable law.

Who Is Responsible for a Motorcycle Accident in Illinois? | Weiss Ortiz

Thu, 08 Oct 2026 01:25:28 GMT

Who is responsible for a motorcycle accident in Illinois? Learn how fault is determined and when another driver, employer, manufacturer, or third party may be liable.

Motorcycle accidents can result in serious injuries, significant medical expenses, lost income, and long-term consequences. When a crash occurs, one of the most important questions is often: Who is responsible for the accident?

The answer is not always as simple as determining which vehicle made contact with the motorcycle.

Depending on the circumstances, responsibility may involve another driver, a motorcycle rider, an employer, a vehicle or motorcycle manufacturer, a government entity, or another party whose negligence contributed to the crash.

Illinois law generally evaluates responsibility based on the conduct of the parties involved and whether that conduct contributed to causing the accident and resulting injuries.

Understanding how fault may be determined can help an injured motorcyclist understand what legal options may be available.

How Is Fault Determined After a Motorcycle Accident in Illinois?

In a personal injury case, determining responsibility generally involves examining whether someone acted negligently and whether that conduct caused the accident and resulting injuries.

Evidence may be used to determine what happened before, during, and after the collision.

Factors that may be considered include:

Whether a driver violated traffic laws.
Whether a driver was distracted.
Whether a driver failed to yield the right of way.
Whether a driver was speeding.
Whether a driver made an unsafe turn or lane change.
Whether a motorcyclist was operating the motorcycle safely.
Road and weather conditions.
Vehicle or motorcycle maintenance.
Statements from witnesses.
Police reports.
Video or surveillance footage.

The specific facts of the accident are important because more than one person or entity may potentially share responsibility.

Can Another Driver Be Responsible for a Motorcycle Accident?

Yes. Another driver's negligence is one of the most common potential sources of liability in a motorcycle accident.

A driver may potentially be responsible when the driver's conduct causes or contributes to the collision.

Examples may include:

Distracted Driving

A driver who is texting, using a phone, adjusting a navigation system, or otherwise distracted may fail to notice a motorcycle.

Because motorcycles are smaller than passenger vehicles, failing to see a motorcycle can have serious consequences.

Failure to Yield

A driver who fails to yield the right of way may cause a collision at an intersection, while turning, merging, or entering a roadway.

Unsafe Lane Changes

A driver who changes lanes without properly checking for motorcycles can cause a serious crash.

Speeding

Excessive or unsafe speed can reduce a driver's ability to react to a motorcycle and increase the severity of a collision.

Driving Under the Influence

Alcohol or drugs can impair reaction time, judgment, and the ability to safely operate a vehicle.

If impaired driving contributed to a motorcycle accident, the circumstances may be relevant to the injured person's claim.

Can a Motorcyclist Be Partially Responsible?

Yes.

The fact that another vehicle was involved does not automatically mean the other driver is entirely responsible.

Illinois follows a modified comparative fault rule. If an injured person's contributory fault is more than 50% of the proximate cause of the injury or damage, the person is barred from recovering damages. If the person's fault is 50% or less , the damages awarded are reduced in proportion to that person's fault.

For example, if a motorcyclist were found to be 20% responsible for an accident and had $100,000 in compensable damages, the recoverable damages could be reduced by 20%, subject to the specific facts and applicable law.

This is why insurance companies may closely examine the motorcyclist's actions after a crash.

Does Not Wearing a Helmet Automatically Prevent a Motorcycle Injury Claim?

Not necessarily.

A helmet issue can become relevant to a motorcycle injury case, but it does not automatically answer the question of who caused the collision.

The circumstances of the accident, the nature of the injuries, and the evidence concerning causation and fault all matter.

Because comparative fault can affect recovery, an injured motorcyclist should have the specific facts of the accident evaluated rather than assuming that one factor automatically determines the outcome.

Can a Motorcycle Manufacturer Be Responsible?

In some cases, a defective motorcycle or component may contribute to an accident or injury.

Depending on the circumstances, a potential claim may involve a manufacturer, distributor, or another party in the product's chain of distribution.

Examples could include problems involving:

Brakes.
Tires.
Steering components.
Throttle systems.
Electrical components.
Other defective motorcycle parts.

These cases can require technical evidence and may involve product liability laws in addition to ordinary negligence principles.

Can Poor Road Conditions Cause a Motorcycle Accident?

Road conditions can also contribute to a motorcycle crash.

Potential hazards may include:

Potholes.
Unsafe construction zones.
Debris.
Defective road surfaces.
Missing or inadequate warnings.
Other dangerous roadway conditions.

Depending on the circumstances, responsibility may involve a government entity, contractor, property owner, or another party.

Claims involving governmental entities can involve additional legal requirements and deadlines, so these cases should be evaluated carefully.

Can an Employer Be Responsible for a Motorcycle Accident?

If a motorcycle accident involves someone who was working at the time of the crash, the employer may potentially become relevant to the claim.

For example, a collision involving a delivery driver or another employee may raise questions about whether the employee was acting within the scope of employment.

The specific facts are important when determining whether an employer or another business may have legal responsibility for an employee's conduct.

Can More Than One Person Be Responsible?

Yes.

A motorcycle accident can involve multiple contributing factors.

For example, another driver may have made an unsafe lane change while a road defect also contributed to the collision.

In another situation, a defective motorcycle component could combine with another driver's negligent conduct.

When multiple parties may have contributed to an accident, determining each party's role and percentage of fault can become an important part of the case.

Illinois law contains specific rules governing comparative fault and the liability of multiple parties.

What Evidence Can Help Prove Responsibility?

Evidence can be critical when determining who caused a motorcycle accident.

Depending on the circumstances, useful evidence may include:

Police reports.
Photographs of the accident scene.
Photographs of the motorcycle and other vehicles.
Dashcam or surveillance footage.
Traffic camera footage.
Witness statements.
Medical records.
Accident reconstruction evidence.
Vehicle damage.
Motorcycle maintenance records.
Cell phone records when relevant.
Road condition photographs.
Insurance information.

Evidence can become more difficult to obtain as time passes.

For that reason, preserving available evidence after an accident can be important.

What If the Other Driver Says the Motorcycle Rider Caused the Crash?

An insurance company's position does not necessarily determine legal responsibility.

After a motorcycle accident, an insurer may argue that the motorcyclist was speeding, failed to yield, changed lanes improperly, or otherwise contributed to the collision.

The evidence should be evaluated as a whole.

Police reports, photographs, witness testimony, video footage, vehicle damage, medical records, and other evidence may help establish what actually happened.

If comparative fault is disputed, determining the percentage of responsibility attributed to each party can significantly affect a potential recovery.

What Damages Can an Injured Motorcyclist Recover?

When another party is legally responsible for a motorcycle accident, an injured person may potentially seek compensation for losses supported by the facts and applicable law.

Depending on the circumstances, damages may include:

Medical expenses.
Future medical treatment.
Lost wages.
Loss of future earning capacity.
Property damage.
Physical pain and suffering.
Disability.
Disfigurement.
Other economic and non-economic losses.

The specific damages available depend on the circumstances of the case and the evidence supporting the claimed losses.

What Should You Do After a Motorcycle Accident?

After a motorcycle crash, taking certain steps may help preserve evidence and protect your interests.

Seek Medical Attention

Some motorcycle accident injuries may not be immediately apparent.

Medical documentation can also help establish the nature and extent of injuries related to the accident.

Document the Scene

If it is safe to do so, take photographs or videos of:

The vehicles.
The motorcycle.
Road conditions.
Traffic signs.
Visible injuries.
Debris.
Damage to surrounding property.

Gather Witness Information

Obtain contact information for people who witnessed the accident whenever possible.

Report the Accident

Follow the appropriate procedures for reporting the collision and obtain a copy of the applicable report when available.

Preserve Evidence

Keep medical records, bills, photographs, insurance documents, repair estimates, and other records related to the accident.

Be Careful When Speaking With Insurance Companies

Insurance companies may ask questions about the accident and your injuries.

Before making statements or accepting a settlement, it may be helpful to understand your legal rights and the potential value of your claim.

How Long Do You Have to File a Motorcycle Accident Claim in Illinois?

Illinois has statutes of limitation that can restrict the amount of time available to file a personal injury lawsuit.

The applicable deadline can depend on the nature of the claim and the parties involved. Additional rules may apply in cases involving governmental entities or other specific circumstances.

Because missing an applicable deadline can affect the ability to pursue a claim, it is important to seek legal advice promptly after a serious motorcycle accident.

How Can a Motorcycle Accident Attorney Help?

Determining responsibility after a motorcycle accident can involve more than simply identifying the vehicle that collided with the motorcycle.

An attorney can investigate the circumstances of the crash, gather available evidence, identify potentially responsible parties, evaluate comparative fault issues, and communicate with insurance companies.

When multiple parties or complicated evidence are involved, a detailed investigation may be particularly important.

Injured in a Motorcycle Accident in Illinois?

If you were injured in a motorcycle accident, determining who is responsible may be an important first step toward understanding your legal options.

Weiss Ortiz Attorneys & Mediators represents individuals dealing with personal injury and other legal matters throughout Cook County, Illinois , including Chicago, La Grange Park, Oak Brook, and Deerfield.

☎️ 773-498-4498
�� weissortizlaw.com

Disclaimer: This article is provided for informational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice. Every motorcycle accident case is different, and past results do not guarantee future outcomes. Reading this article does not create an attorney-client relationship. If you have been injured in a motorcycle accident, consult with a qualified Illinois attorney about your specific circumstances.

How Will Illinois’ 2027 Child Support Changes Affect Shared Parenting? | Weiss Ortiz

Wed, 07 Oct 2026 00:43:54 GMT

Learn how Illinois’ 2027 child support changes may affect parents with shared parenting, including the new 110-overnight threshold and overnight equivalents.

Illinois is changing how child support is calculated for parents who share physical care of their children.

Beginning January 1, 2027, a new law will change the way Illinois courts calculate child support when parents have significant parenting time with their children. One of the most important changes is the reduction of the shared physical care threshold from 146 overnights per year to 110 overnights or qualifying overnight equivalents.

For parents who have parenting schedules that fall between 110 and 145 overnights, this change could affect how child support is calculated.

The new law is designed to address situations in which a parent has substantial parenting time but does not reach the previous 146-overnight threshold.

What Is Changing in Illinois Child Support in 2027?

Under the new law, which takes effect January 1, 2027, Illinois will recognize shared physical care when each parent exercises at least 110 overnights per year with the child.

The law also allows certain periods of significant parenting time that do not involve an overnight stay to potentially count as overnight equivalents .

This means that the number of nights a child spends at each parent's home will not necessarily be the only factor considered when determining whether the shared-care child support calculation applies.

The change is particularly important for parents whose parenting schedules provide substantial daytime care but previously fell short of the 146-overnight threshold.

What Is the Current 146-Overnight Rule?

Under the current Illinois child support framework, the shared-care calculation generally applies when each parent has at least 146 overnights with the child during the year.

This has sometimes created a significant difference between parenting schedules that are very close to one another.

For example, a parent with 145 overnights could be treated differently from a parent with 146 overnights under the existing framework.

The 2027 changes are intended to provide additional calculations for parents with substantial parenting time who fall below 146 overnights.

What Will Happen at 110 Overnights?

Beginning in 2027, 110 overnights will become an important threshold.

If both parents have at least 110 overnights, the court can use the shared physical care child support calculation.

The new law also creates a specific adjustment system for parents who have between 110 and 145 overnights.

The adjustment decreases as the number of overnights increases:

110–114 overnights: 10% adjustment
115–119 overnights: 9%
120–124 overnights: 8%
125–129 overnights: 7%
130–134 overnights: 6%
135–139 overnights: 4%
140–145 overnights: 2%

These adjustments are applied within the shared-care child support calculation and do not simply mean that child support will automatically decrease by the listed percentage.

What Are “Overnight Equivalents”?

One of the most significant changes is the introduction of overnight equivalents .

Under the new law, certain significant parenting periods that occur during separate days may be considered when determining shared physical care, even when the child does not stay overnight.

For example, a parent may have substantial periods of direct physical care during the day but return the child to the other parent's home at night.

Under the new framework, qualifying parenting time may potentially be converted into overnight equivalents for purposes of the child support calculation.

This could be particularly relevant for parents whose schedules involve extensive weekday parenting time, after-school care, or other substantial periods of direct care that do not result in overnight stays.

How Will Shared-Care Child Support Be Calculated?

The new law continues to use a shared-care formula rather than simply dividing child support equally between the parents.

When parents have shared physical care, the basic child support obligation is multiplied by 1.5 to determine the combined shared-care obligation.

The court then considers each parent's percentage share of the combined adjusted net income and the percentage of time the child spends with the other parent.

The resulting obligations are then offset against each other, with the parent who owes the larger amount generally paying the difference.

For parents with fewer than 146 overnights or overnight equivalents, the applicable adjustment is also considered.

This means that income and parenting time can both play an important role in determining the final child support amount.

Will Parents With 110 to 145 Overnights Automatically Pay Less Child Support?

Not necessarily.

The 2027 law does not mean that every parent who has between 110 and 145 overnights will automatically receive a lower child support obligation.

The calculation depends on several factors, including:

Each parent's adjusted net income.
The percentage of parenting time.
The number of overnights or qualifying overnight equivalents.
The applicable shared-care adjustment.
The number of children.
Other factors included in the child support calculation.

The law also provides that the adjusted shared-care obligation cannot exceed the amount that would have been ordered under the basic child support guidelines.

Because of these factors, two parents with similar parenting schedules could still have different child support obligations.

Does This Change Parenting Time or Custody?

The child support changes do not automatically give either parent additional parenting time.

Child support and parenting time are related in the calculation of support, but they are separate legal issues.

Illinois courts determine parenting time based on the child's best interests and other factors established by Illinois law.

A parent should not assume that reaching 110 overnights automatically creates a right to an equal parenting schedule or changes an existing parenting order.

Instead, the parenting schedule and child support calculation should be evaluated separately.

What If Your Parenting Schedule Is Close to 110 Overnights?

If your current parenting schedule is close to the new threshold, it may be important to review the actual number of overnights and the amount of parenting time you exercise throughout the year.

A difference of several overnights could affect which calculation applies.

Parents should also keep accurate records of their parenting schedules, particularly when the actual schedule differs from what is written in an existing parenting order.

If significant daytime parenting time may qualify as overnight equivalents under the new law, those periods may also need to be evaluated.

Can an Existing Child Support Order Change in 2027?

The new law does not mean that every existing child support order will automatically change on January 1, 2027.

A parent seeking to change an existing child support order generally needs to follow the applicable modification process.

Depending on the circumstances, a change in parenting time, income, or other substantial circumstances may be relevant to a request for modification.

Parents should not stop or change court-ordered child support payments on their own simply because the law has changed.

Until a child support order is modified through the appropriate process, the existing order generally remains in effect.

Why Should Parents Review Their Parenting Schedule Before 2027?

Parents with shared or nearly shared parenting schedules may want to understand how the new rules could apply before the changes take effect.

A review may be particularly important if:

Each parent has between 110 and 145 overnights.
One parent has substantial daytime parenting time without overnight stays.
The actual parenting schedule differs from the court-ordered schedule.
Either parent's income has changed significantly.
A parent is considering requesting a modification of child support.
The parents are negotiating a new parenting plan or child support arrangement.

Understanding the new calculation can help parents make more informed decisions when negotiating parenting and support issues.

What Evidence Can Help Establish Parenting Time?

Accurate records can be important when child support depends on the amount of parenting time each parent exercises.

Depending on the circumstances, useful documentation may include:

Parenting time calendars.
Court-approved parenting plans.
School or daycare records.
Transportation records.
Written communications between parents.
Records showing exchanges and pickups.
Documentation of significant daytime parenting periods.

Parents should keep records that accurately reflect the parenting schedule rather than attempting to create a schedule solely to change a child support calculation.

How Can a Family Law Attorney Help?

Illinois' 2027 child support changes may create new considerations for parents with shared parenting schedules.

An attorney can review the existing parenting order, evaluate the number of overnights and potential overnight equivalents, review the parents' financial information, and explain how the new rules may affect a particular situation.

Because child support calculations are highly dependent on the facts of each family, there is no single amount that applies to every shared-parenting arrangement.

Need Help Understanding Illinois’ 2027 Child Support Changes?

If you share parenting time with your child's other parent, the changes taking effect in 2027 may affect how child support is calculated in your case.

Weiss Ortiz Attorneys & Mediators can help parents understand their rights and legal options regarding child support, parenting time, and other Illinois family law matters.

Serving Cook County, Illinois , including Chicago, La Grange Park, Oak Brook, and Deerfield.

☎️ 773-498-4498
�� weissortizlaw.com

Disclaimer: This article is provided for informational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice. Every family law case is different. The information in this article does not create an attorney-client relationship. Parents should consult with a qualified Illinois family law attorney about their specific circumstances.

How to Prove a Property Owner Knew About a Hazard in Illinois | Weiss Ortiz

Fri, 02 Oct 2026 00:03:27 GMT

Learn how to prove a property owner knew or should have known about a dangerous condition after a slip and fall in Illinois, and what evidence may support your claim.

After a slip and fall accident, one of the most important questions is whether the property owner knew—or reasonably should have known—about the dangerous condition that caused the injury.

A wet floor, spilled liquid, broken step, damaged walkway, or other hazard can create a serious risk for visitors. However, proving that a dangerous condition existed is not always enough to establish liability. In many Illinois premises liability cases, the injured person must also show that the property owner or person responsible for the premises had notice of the hazard and failed to take reasonable steps to address it.

This requirement can make slip and fall claims challenging, particularly when the property owner denies knowing about the condition.

Understanding how actual and constructive notice work under Illinois law can help you identify the evidence that may support your claim.

Why Does Notice Matter in an Illinois Slip and Fall Case?

In Illinois, property owners and others responsible for maintaining premises generally have a duty to exercise reasonable care to keep their property reasonably safe for lawful visitors.

When someone is injured because of a dangerous condition, the circumstances surrounding that condition are important. A personal injury claim may depend on whether the responsible party knew about the hazard, should have discovered it through reasonable care, or created the condition through its own negligence.

For example, imagine that a customer slips on a puddle inside a grocery store. The customer may be able to establish that the puddle caused the fall, but additional evidence may be needed to show that the store knew about the puddle or should have discovered it before the accident.

This is why evidence of notice can be critical to a premises liability claim.

What Is Actual Notice?

Actual notice means that the property owner or a responsible employee or agent knew about the dangerous condition before the accident.

This may be established through evidence showing that someone reported the hazard, an employee observed it, or the responsible party otherwise became aware of the problem.

Examples of evidence that may support actual notice include:

A customer complaint about a spill or slippery floor.
An employee report documenting a dangerous condition.
A maintenance request concerning a broken step or damaged walkway.
Surveillance footage showing an employee observing the hazard before the fall.
Emails, text messages, or other communications discussing the condition.
Testimony from a witness who notified management about the danger.

For instance, if a customer tells a store employee about a liquid spill and the spill remains on the floor until another customer falls, that report may help establish that the store had actual notice.

The timing matters. Evidence that the property owner learned about the hazard only after the accident may not establish that the owner had notice in time to take corrective action.

What Is Constructive Notice?

Constructive notice applies when the responsible party did not necessarily know about the hazard directly but should have discovered it through the exercise of reasonable care.

In Illinois, constructive notice may be established by showing that a dangerous condition existed long enough that a reasonable inspection would have discovered it. Evidence that a hazard was part of a recurring pattern may also be relevant in certain cases.

For example, suppose a liquid spill remains on a store floor for an extended period without being cleaned up. If reasonable inspections should have identified the spill before someone fell, the circumstances may support an argument that the store had constructive notice.

However, there is no universal number of minutes or hours that automatically establishes constructive notice. Courts evaluate the evidence and circumstances of each case.

How Long Did the Hazard Exist?

The length of time a dangerous condition existed before an accident can be particularly important.

If a hazard appeared only moments before someone fell, it may be difficult to show that the property owner had a reasonable opportunity to discover and correct it.

By contrast, evidence that a spill, obstruction, or other dangerous condition remained in place for a substantial period may support an argument that the responsible party should have discovered it.

The challenge is often establishing how long the hazard existed. Photographs taken after the accident may show what the condition looked like, but they may not establish when it first appeared.

Surveillance footage, inspection records, witness statements, and maintenance documentation may help fill that gap.

Could the Property Owner Have Discovered the Hazard Through Reasonable Inspections?

Constructive notice also involves whether the responsible party exercised reasonable care in inspecting and maintaining the property.

Relevant questions may include:

Did the property have a regular inspection or cleaning schedule?
Were inspections actually performed as scheduled?
Were employees expected to monitor the area where the accident occurred?
Were previous hazards reported in the same location?
Did the property owner have a procedure for addressing spills, debris, or damaged surfaces?
Would a reasonable inspection have revealed the condition before the accident?

The appropriate inspection practices may depend on the type of property, the area involved, and the circumstances that created the hazard.

A business with frequent foot traffic, for example, may face different practical inspection considerations than a location with little activity.

What If the Property Owner Created the Dangerous Condition?

A separate issue arises when the property owner or its employees created the dangerous condition.

Under Illinois law, a plaintiff generally does not need to establish actual or constructive notice in the same way when the defendant's own negligence created the hazard.

For example, if an employee negligently leaves a spill on a walkway, evidence of that conduct may support a claim without requiring the injured person to prove how long the spill remained there.

The distinction is important because the evidence needed to establish liability can differ depending on how the hazard arose.

If the condition was created by another customer or an unknown third party, evidence of the responsible party's notice may become particularly important.

What Evidence Can Help Prove Notice?

Evidence can help establish what the responsible party knew, when it knew it, and whether it had a reasonable opportunity to address the danger. Depending on the circumstances, useful evidence may include the following.

Surveillance Footage

Security cameras may show when a spill or obstruction appeared, whether employees passed through the area, and whether anyone attempted to clean or correct the hazard.

Footage can be especially important when the property owner disputes how long the condition existed.

Incident Reports

An incident report may document the accident, the location of the hazard, statements from employees, and any observations made after the fall.

Prior reports involving the same condition or location may also be relevant, depending on the facts and applicable evidentiary rules.

Inspection and Maintenance Records

Cleaning logs, inspection checklists, work orders, and maintenance records may help establish whether the property was inspected and whether the hazard should have been discovered.

These records may also reveal gaps in an inspection or maintenance routine.

Witness Statements

People who saw the hazard before the accident may be able to explain how long it was present or whether they reported it to an employee.

Employees, customers, contractors, and other visitors may have relevant information.

Photographs and Videos

Photographs of the accident scene can help document the condition of the floor, stairs, walkway, lighting, warning signs, or other relevant features.

If possible, photographs should be taken safely and without altering the scene. Images taken shortly after the accident may preserve details that could later change.

Prior Complaints and Communications

Complaints, emails, maintenance requests, or other communications may show that the responsible party had previously been informed of a dangerous condition.

Whether prior incidents or complaints can be used as evidence depends on the circumstances and applicable legal rules.

What If the Property Owner Says It Did Not Know About the Hazard?

It is common for a property owner or business to dispute having knowledge of a dangerous condition.

A lack of direct evidence that an employee saw the hazard does not necessarily end the inquiry. Constructive notice may be established through circumstantial evidence showing that the condition existed long enough—or occurred repeatedly enough—that reasonable care should have led to its discovery.

For example, surveillance footage may show that a spill remained in a busy area for an extended period. Inspection records may show that the area was not checked as required. Witness testimony may establish that the hazard was present before the injured person arrived.

Taken together, evidence like this may help establish constructive notice.

However, the mere fact that an accident occurred does not automatically prove that the property owner knew or should have known about the hazard.

What If the Dangerous Condition Was Recurring?

Some hazards arise repeatedly in the same location.

For example, a particular entrance may frequently become wet during rainy weather, or a specific area may repeatedly accumulate debris.

Evidence of a recurring condition may be relevant to whether the property owner should have anticipated the danger and taken reasonable steps to address it.

Relevant evidence may include prior incident reports, maintenance records, employee testimony, and documentation of repeated complaints.

A recurring condition does not automatically establish liability. The evidence must still support the applicable legal requirements under the circumstances.

What Should You Do After a Slip and Fall Accident?

If you are injured in a slip and fall accident in Illinois, taking certain steps may help preserve evidence and protect your ability to evaluate a potential claim.

1. Seek Medical Attention

Your health should come first. Get medical attention for your injuries and follow your healthcare provider's recommendations.

Medical records may also help document the nature and extent of your injuries.

2. Report the Accident

Notify the property owner, manager, or appropriate employee about the incident. If an incident report is prepared, ask how you can obtain a copy.

Keep a record of when and to whom you reported the accident.

3. Document the Scene

If it is safe to do so, photograph or record the condition that caused your fall, including any liquid, debris, damaged flooring, missing handrail, or warning sign.

Record the date, time, and exact location of the accident.

4. Identify Witnesses

If anyone saw the fall or the dangerous condition beforehand, ask for their contact information.

Witnesses may have information about how long the hazard existed or whether someone reported it.

5. Preserve Relevant Records

Keep medical bills, treatment records, communications with the property owner or insurance company, and any photographs or videos related to the incident.

Avoid deleting messages or other materials that may be relevant.

6. Consider Prompt Legal Guidance

Surveillance footage and other records may not remain available indefinitely. An attorney can help evaluate what evidence may be relevant and whether steps should be taken to preserve it.

Can You Still Have a Claim If You Were Partly at Fault?

Potentially. Illinois follows a modified comparative negligence system.

Under Illinois law, a person may generally recover damages if their contribution to the injury is not more than 50%. Any recovery may be reduced in proportion to the person's percentage of fault. If the person's fault is more than 50%, recovery is barred under the statute.

For example, if a person is found 20% responsible for an accident and the total damages are $100,000, the recoverable amount would generally be reduced to $80,000.

The application of comparative negligence depends on the facts of the case, including whether the injured person could reasonably have noticed or avoided the hazard.

How Long Do You Have to File a Slip and Fall Lawsuit in Illinois?

The deadline for filing a personal injury lawsuit depends on the circumstances of the case and the parties involved.

In many Illinois personal injury cases, the general statute of limitations is two years from the date the cause of action accrued. However, exceptions may apply, including cases involving certain public entities, minors, or other special circumstances.

Because missing a filing deadline can affect your ability to pursue a claim, it is important to have the applicable deadline evaluated promptly.

How Can a Slip and Fall Attorney Help?

Slip and fall claims can involve more than documenting the injury. Establishing what the property owner knew—or should have known—may require a careful review of the accident scene, inspection procedures, surveillance footage, witness statements, and maintenance records.

An attorney may help by:

Evaluating whether the facts support a premises liability claim.
Identifying evidence relevant to actual or constructive notice.
Helping seek preservation of surveillance footage and other records.
Reviewing incident reports and maintenance documentation.
Communicating with insurance companies.
Assessing the potential impact of comparative negligence.
Explaining the legal options available based on the circumstances.

Every case is different, and the available evidence plays an important role in evaluating whether a claim may succeed.

Injured in a Slip and Fall Accident in Illinois?

If you were injured after slipping or falling on someone else's property, you may have questions about who is responsible and how to prove that the dangerous condition should have been addressed.

Weiss Ortiz Attorneys & Mediators can help you understand your legal options and evaluate the circumstances of your accident.

Serving Cook County, Illinois , including Chicago, La Grange Park, Oak Brook, Deerfield, and surrounding communities.

Contact Weiss Ortiz Attorneys & Mediators for a free consultation.

�� 773-498-4498
�� weissortizlaw.com

This article is for informational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice. Reading this content does not create an attorney-client relationship. The outcome of any legal matter depends on its specific facts and applicable law.

Can You Recover Personal Property From an Ex in Illinois? | Weiss Ortiz

Thu, 01 Oct 2026 22:23:38 GMT

Can you recover personal property from an ex in Illinois? Learn how Illinois law treats personal property, marital assets, and legal options to recover belongings.

After a separation or divorce, dividing property is not always as simple as deciding who keeps the house or splitting financial accounts. Personal belongings can also become a source of conflict.

Furniture, jewelry, electronics, family heirlooms, artwork, documents, vehicles, and other personal items may remain in the possession of a former spouse after the relationship ends. In some situations, one person may believe that the property belongs exclusively to them, while the other person claims it is marital property or jointly owned.

So, can you legally recover personal property from an ex in Illinois?

In some circumstances, yes. The legal options available depend on factors such as who owns the property, whether it is marital or non-marital property, whether a divorce judgment addressed the item, and whether the former spouse is unlawfully retaining it.

Illinois law provides mechanisms for addressing property disputes between spouses and former spouses. Understanding how the property is classified and what legal remedies may be available is an important first step.

What Is Considered Personal Property in Illinois?

Personal property generally refers to property that is not real estate or land.

Examples can include:

Furniture
Jewelry
Electronics
Clothing
Artwork
Family heirlooms
Collectibles
Vehicles
Business equipment
Personal documents
Household items

The fact that an item is physically located in your former spouse's home does not necessarily determine who legally owns it.

Ownership and classification can depend on how the property was acquired, when it was acquired, whether it was gifted or inherited, whether it was placed into joint ownership, and whether a divorce agreement or court judgment addressed the property.

Is the Property Marital or Non-Marital Property?

One of the most important questions in an Illinois divorce property dispute is whether the property is marital property or non-marital property .

Under the Illinois Marriage and Dissolution of Marriage Act, property acquired by either spouse after the marriage and before the judgment of dissolution is generally presumed to be marital property, subject to statutory exceptions. Non-marital property can include certain property acquired by gift, inheritance, or before the marriage, among other statutory categories.

Examples of Potentially Non-Marital Property

Depending on the circumstances, property may be considered non-marital if it was:

Acquired before the marriage
Received as an individual gift
Inherited individually
Acquired in exchange for certain non-marital property
Excluded by a valid agreement between the spouses
Otherwise covered by an exception under Illinois law

However, classification can become complicated when separate property is commingled with marital property or transferred into joint ownership.

Examples of Potentially Marital Property

Property acquired during the marriage is generally presumed to be marital property unless an applicable exception is established.

This can include:

Furniture purchased during the marriage
Vehicles acquired during the marriage
Household goods
Electronics
Artwork
Other personal belongings purchased with marital funds

Being marital property does not necessarily mean that both spouses will receive an equal share of every individual item. Illinois courts divide marital property in just proportions based on the statutory factors rather than simply dividing every item 50/50.

What If My Ex Has Property That Belongs to Me?

If your former spouse is in possession of property that you legally own, Illinois law may provide a way to seek its return.

Illinois law specifically provides that if one spouse unlawfully obtains or retains possession or control of property belonging to the other spouse, the owner may bring an action regarding that property in the same manner and to the same extent as if the parties were unmarried. This provision was updated effective January 1, 2026.

This can be relevant when a former spouse refuses to return property that belongs exclusively to the other person.

However, determining whether an item legally belongs to one spouse is not always straightforward. A disagreement about ownership may require examining documents, purchase records, inheritance records, communications, photographs, and the terms of any divorce judgment or settlement agreement.

What If the Item Was Acquired During the Marriage?

This situation can be more complicated.

If an item was acquired during the marriage, it may be presumed to be marital property unless an exception applies.

For example, if you purchased a television during the marriage using marital income, you generally cannot assume that the television automatically belongs exclusively to you simply because you purchased it.

The same may apply to furniture, appliances, artwork, vehicles, or other household belongings.

If the property is marital, the question may be part of the overall division of marital assets rather than a simple claim that one spouse owns the individual item.

What If My Ex Keeps an Heirloom or Gift That Belongs to Me?

Certain gifts and inheritances can be classified as non-marital property under Illinois law.

For example, an individual inheritance received by one spouse may generally be treated as non-marital property, subject to the applicable statutory rules and circumstances.

Family heirlooms can present additional questions because the history of ownership may matter.

Evidence showing that an item was specifically gifted to one spouse, inherited by one spouse, or owned before the marriage may be relevant when determining ownership.

Useful documentation may include:

Wills or probate records
Gift documentation
Receipts
Photographs
Insurance records
Appraisals
Family communications
Messages identifying the intended recipient

What If My Divorce Judgment Already Says Who Gets the Property?

If your divorce judgment or settlement agreement specifically addresses an item, that document can be extremely important.

A property settlement may establish which spouse receives particular property or how certain assets should be divided.

Illinois law provides that property provisions contained in an agreement are generally not modifiable after they become part of the judgment.

If your former spouse is refusing to comply with a judgment or agreement incorporated into the judgment, the issue may involve enforcement of the court's order rather than simply determining ownership.

The appropriate legal procedure depends on the language of the judgment and the circumstances of the dispute.

What If My Ex Sold or Gave Away My Property?

A property dispute can become more complicated if the item is no longer in your former spouse's possession.

If a former spouse sold, transferred, concealed, or otherwise disposed of property that you claim belongs to you, the available legal remedies may depend on:

Who owned the property
Whether the property was marital or non-marital
Whether a court order addressed the property
When the transfer occurred
Whether the transfer was authorized
Whether the property can still be recovered
Whether another person currently possesses the property

Illinois divorce law also gives courts authority, in appropriate circumstances, to restrict parties from transferring, concealing, or disposing of property during a pending dissolution proceeding.

Because the facts can significantly affect the available remedies, it is important to address a suspected transfer or concealment promptly.

Can I Take My Belongings From My Ex's House?

You should be cautious about attempting to retrieve disputed property yourself.

Even if you believe an item belongs to you, entering a former spouse's home without permission or taking property that is subject to a dispute can create additional legal problems.

A safer approach may be to document what belongs to you and seek an appropriate legal solution.

Depending on the circumstances, this may involve:

Negotiating a property return
Sending a formal demand
Seeking enforcement of an existing court order
Asking the court for appropriate relief
Pursuing a separate legal action concerning ownership or possession

The appropriate option depends on the facts and the legal status of the property.

What Evidence Can Help Prove Ownership?

If you are trying to recover personal property from a former spouse, documentation can be extremely important.

Consider preserving:

Purchase Records

Receipts, invoices, credit card statements, and bank records may help establish who purchased an item and when.

Photographs

Photographs showing the item in your possession or in your home can provide useful context regarding ownership and possession.

Gift or Inheritance Records

Documents establishing that an item was gifted or inherited by you may be important when determining whether it is non-marital property.

Communications

Text messages, emails, or other communications discussing ownership or agreeing that an item belongs to one person may become relevant.

Appraisals and Insurance Records

For valuable property such as jewelry, artwork, collectibles, or antiques, appraisals and insurance documentation may help establish the item's identity and value.

Divorce Documents

Your marital settlement agreement, judgment for dissolution, property inventory, or other court documents may establish how an item was supposed to be handled.

What Should I Do If My Ex Refuses to Return My Property?

If your former spouse refuses to return property you believe belongs to you, consider taking the following steps.

1. Identify the Property

Create a detailed list of the items you believe belong to you.

Include descriptions, approximate values, photographs, serial numbers, and any other identifying information when available.

2. Gather Evidence of Ownership

Collect receipts, financial records, photographs, gift documentation, inheritance records, and relevant communications.

3. Review Your Divorce Documents

If you are divorced, review your judgment and any marital settlement agreement to determine whether the property was already addressed.

4. Avoid Self-Help Retrieval

Do not assume you can enter your former spouse's home or take disputed property simply because you believe you own it.

5. Consider Legal Counsel

An attorney can review the ownership issue, determine whether the property was addressed in your divorce, and explain possible methods of seeking its return.

Can the Court Help Me Recover Personal Property?

Potentially, depending on the circumstances.

Illinois courts can address property disputes in dissolution proceedings, including the classification and division of marital and non-marital property.

In certain circumstances, Illinois law also permits an owner to pursue an action when a spouse unlawfully obtains or retains possession or control of property belonging to the other spouse.

The appropriate remedy depends on the facts, including whether the parties are currently married, separated, or divorced; whether a dissolution case is pending; whether an existing judgment addresses the property; and whether the property is marital or non-marital.

What If We Were Never Married?

Property disputes between unmarried former partners can involve different legal rules than disputes between spouses.

Illinois law regarding marital property and the division of marital assets generally applies to marriages and certain related proceedings under the Illinois Marriage and Dissolution of Marriage Act.

If you were never married, ownership may instead depend on factors such as title, purchase records, agreements between the parties, gifts, and other applicable property laws.

The fact that two people lived together does not automatically mean they jointly own everything they acquired.

Can Personal Property Be Included in a Divorce Settlement?

Yes.

Personal property can be addressed as part of the overall division of marital property in a divorce.

A settlement agreement may identify specific items, assign property to one spouse, establish how property will be sold, or otherwise resolve disputes concerning personal belongings.

Resolving these issues during the divorce can help reduce uncertainty after the judgment is entered.

However, once a judgment or settlement has established the parties' property rights, enforcing those terms may require a separate legal step if one party refuses to comply.

How Can a Family Law Attorney Help Recover Personal Property?

A family law attorney can help determine what legal options may be available based on the ownership and status of the property.

An attorney may help you:

Determine whether the property is marital or non-marital.
Review your divorce judgment and settlement agreement.
Gather and organize evidence of ownership.
Communicate with your former spouse or their attorney.
Seek enforcement of an existing court order.
Evaluate whether another legal action may be appropriate.
Represent you in court if litigation becomes necessary.

Because property disputes can involve both family law and property-law issues, the appropriate legal strategy depends on the specific circumstances.

Speak With Weiss Ortiz About Recovering Personal Property in Illinois

If your former spouse is refusing to return personal belongings you believe belong to you, you may have legal options.

Weiss Ortiz Attorneys & Mediators helps individuals navigate divorce, property disputes, and other family law matters throughout Cook County, Illinois , including Chicago, La Grange Park, Oak Brook, Deerfield, and surrounding communities.

Our attorneys can review your situation, examine the relevant documents, and help you understand the legal options that may be available for addressing your property dispute.

Schedule a Free Consultation

Weiss Ortiz Attorneys & Mediators
Serving Cook County, Illinois
Chicago | La Grange Park | Oak Brook | Deerfield
Phone: 773-498-4498
Website: weissortizlaw.com

This article is for general informational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice. Property rights and available remedies depend on the facts and circumstances of each case. Illinois law may change, and court procedures can vary depending on the nature of the dispute. Reading this article does not create an attorney-client relationship.

What Happens If Someone Violates a Family Court Order in Illinois? | Weiss Ortiz

Fri, 25 Sep 2026 02:05:29 GMT

What Happens If Someone Violates a Family Court Order in Illinois? Learn what can happen when someone violates a family court order in Illinois, including parenting time, child support, custody, and contempt of court.

Family court orders are legally enforceable. Whether an order establishes parenting time, child support, decision-making responsibilities, spousal maintenance, or another family law obligation, both parties are generally expected to follow the terms ordered by the court.

But what happens when one person refuses to follow the order?

A missed parenting-time exchange, unpaid support, failure to comply with a court-ordered obligation, or repeated disregard of a family court order can create serious legal issues. Depending on the circumstances, the court may have several ways to address the violation, including contempt proceedings and other remedies.

If you believe someone has violated a family court order in Illinois, understanding the available legal process can help you determine what steps may be appropriate.

What Is a Family Court Order?

A family court order is a directive issued by a court in a family law proceeding. These orders can address many different issues involving spouses, parents, and children.

Examples include orders concerning:

Parenting time
Allocation of parental responsibilities
Child support
Spousal maintenance
Property or financial obligations
Decision-making responsibilities
Orders of protection
Other requirements established by the court

A court order is different from an informal agreement between two people. If a parent or former spouse disagrees with an existing order, they generally should not simply disregard it. Depending on the circumstances, the appropriate course may be to ask the court to modify the order rather than violate it.

What Counts as a Violation of a Family Court Order?

A violation can occur when a person knowingly fails to comply with a requirement imposed by the court.

The specific violation depends on what the order requires. Examples may include:

Failing to Follow a Parenting-Time Schedule

A parent may violate an order by repeatedly refusing to provide the parenting time allocated to the other parent or by failing to exercise parenting time as required.

Illinois law provides specific remedies when a parent fails to comply with an order concerning allocated parenting time.

Failing to Pay Court-Ordered Child Support

If a parent does not make required child support payments, the unpaid amount can create an enforcement issue. Child support orders may be enforced through procedures established under Illinois law.

A parent who cannot afford the current amount should generally seek a modification through the court rather than simply stop making payments.

Failing to Follow Decision-Making Provisions

A parenting order may establish how parents are expected to make certain major decisions involving their children. Ignoring those requirements can create a dispute that may need court intervention.

Failing to Comply With Financial or Property Requirements

Family court orders can also impose obligations involving property, payments, or other financial matters. Failing to comply with those requirements may result in an enforcement proceeding.

Violating an Order of Protection

Orders of protection are subject to specific enforcement provisions in Illinois. A violation of a valid order of protection can potentially result in civil or criminal contempt proceedings, depending on the circumstances.

Because violations of orders of protection can involve separate legal consequences, anyone facing such an allegation should take the matter seriously.

Can Violating a Family Court Order Result in Contempt of Court?

Yes. In appropriate circumstances, a court can address a violation through contempt proceedings.

In Illinois family law cases, contempt can be used as a mechanism to enforce compliance with a court order. The exact procedure and potential consequences depend on the type of order and the facts surrounding the alleged violation.

Civil contempt and criminal contempt serve different purposes.

Civil Contempt

Civil contempt is generally focused on obtaining compliance with a court order or addressing the consequences of noncompliance.

For example, when a person is found in indirect civil contempt, the court may establish a means by which the person can come into compliance with the order.

The purpose and available remedies depend on the specific circumstances of the case.

Criminal Contempt

Criminal contempt is different because it can involve punishment for conduct that violates the authority or orders of the court.

Whether conduct is treated as civil or criminal contempt depends on the nature and purpose of the proceeding and the court's orders.

An attorney can help explain which enforcement mechanism may apply to a particular situation.

What Can Happen If a Parent Violates a Parenting-Time Order?

Illinois law provides specific remedies for violations involving allocated parenting time.

Depending on the circumstances, a court may:

Find the non-complying parent in contempt of court.
Impose an appropriate civil fine for each incident of denied parenting time.
Require the non-complying parent to reimburse reasonable expenses caused by the violation.
Award reasonable attorney's fees, court costs, and expenses in circumstances provided by law.
Enter other provisions designed to promote the child's best interests.

In certain cases involving parenting-time abuse, additional consequences may be available. These can include restrictions involving driving privileges, probation, periodic imprisonment, or a petty-offense fine, depending on the statutory requirements and the court's findings.

These consequences are not automatic. The court considers the circumstances and applicable legal requirements when determining an appropriate remedy.

What If Someone Violates a Child Support Order?

Child support orders are enforceable court orders. If a parent fails to make required payments, the other parent may have legal options for enforcement.

Depending on the circumstances, enforcement can involve:

Filing the appropriate enforcement action.
Seeking a finding of contempt.
Pursuing available statutory remedies for unpaid support.
Addressing the amount of support owed.
Seeking appropriate relief through the court.

If a parent's financial circumstances have changed, that does not necessarily mean the existing support order automatically changes.

A parent who believes the ordered amount should be changed generally needs to pursue a modification through the appropriate legal process.

What Should You Do If Your Ex Is Not Following the Court Order?

If you believe your former spouse or co-parent is violating a family court order, avoid responding by violating the order yourself.

Instead, consider taking the following steps:

1. Review the Existing Order

Read the actual court order carefully. Determine exactly what it requires, including dates, deadlines, payment obligations, and parenting-time provisions.

2. Document the Violations

Keep records of what happened, including:

Dates and times
Missed exchanges
Missed parenting time
Unpaid amounts
Relevant emails or text messages
Communication regarding the violation
Receipts or other documentation
Witness information, when relevant

Clear documentation can help establish what occurred.

3. Preserve Relevant Communications

Save messages, emails, and other communications relating to the alleged violation.

Avoid editing or altering messages. Keeping the original information can be important if the dispute eventually requires court review.

4. Continue Following the Court Order

Even if the other party is not complying, do not assume that you are free to disregard the order.

If you believe the order is no longer workable or appropriate, there may be a legal process available to request a modification.

5. Consider Speaking With a Family Law Attorney

An attorney can review the existing order, the alleged violations, and the available documentation and explain potential enforcement options.

What Is a Rule to Show Cause?

A party seeking enforcement of a court order may, depending on the circumstances and applicable procedure, ask the court to require the other party to explain why they should not be held in contempt.

This type of proceeding is commonly associated with a petition or motion seeking a rule to show cause.

The precise procedure depends on the type of order and the circumstances of the case. The person alleging a violation generally needs to present sufficient evidence for the court to evaluate whether the order was violated and what remedy, if any, is appropriate.

Because contempt proceedings can have significant consequences, the applicable procedural requirements matter.

What If the Other Parent Says They Had a Good Reason for Violating the Order?

Not every failure to comply with a court order will result in the same outcome.

The court may consider the circumstances surrounding the alleged violation, including whether the person had the ability to comply, what prevented compliance, and other facts relevant under the applicable law.

For example, a genuine emergency or circumstances outside a person's control may be relevant to the court's analysis.

However, a person should not assume that they can unilaterally decide that a court order no longer applies.

If circumstances have changed, seeking appropriate relief from the court may be safer than simply ignoring the existing order.

Can a Family Court Order Be Changed Instead of Violated?

In many situations, a party may be able to ask the court to modify an existing order when circumstances have changed or when the current order is no longer appropriate.

This can be particularly important when circumstances affecting a child, parenting schedule, finances, or other family-law obligations have changed.

The existence of a dispute does not automatically change the existing order. Until a court modifies the order, the parties should understand what the current order requires and what legal options may be available.

What Evidence Can Help Prove a Violation?

The type of evidence that is useful depends on the order and the alleged violation.

Potential evidence may include:

A certified or filed copy of the court order
Parenting calendars
Text messages and emails
Payment records
Bank or financial records
School or childcare records
Police reports, when relevant
Medical records, when relevant
Witness testimony
Documentation of missed parenting-time exchanges

The more clearly the evidence shows what the order required and what actually occurred, the easier it may be for the court to evaluate the dispute.

Can You Be Punished for Violating a Family Court Order?

Potential consequences depend on the type of order, the nature of the violation, and the court's findings.

Possible consequences may include:

A finding of contempt
Fines
Reimbursement of certain expenses
Attorney's fees or court costs where authorized
Orders designed to obtain future compliance
Changes or restrictions involving parenting time in appropriate circumstances
Additional consequences in cases involving parenting-time abuse
Criminal consequences for certain violations of orders of protection or other circumstances where criminal enforcement applies

A violation does not automatically result in every possible consequence. The court determines what remedies are authorized and appropriate based on the circumstances and applicable Illinois law.

What If You Are Accused of Violating a Family Court Order?

If someone claims that you violated a family court order, do not ignore the allegation.

Review the order carefully and preserve documentation showing what occurred. If you receive a court filing, notice, or hearing date, pay close attention to the deadlines and requirements.

An attorney can help you understand the allegations, prepare a response, and determine whether there are defenses or other issues that should be presented to the court.

How Can a Family Law Attorney Help With a Court Order Violation?

Family court enforcement disputes can become complicated, particularly when they involve children, parenting time, child support, or allegations of repeated noncompliance.

A family law attorney can help by:

Reviewing the existing court order.
Evaluating the alleged violation.
Organizing relevant evidence.
Explaining potential enforcement options.
Preparing appropriate court filings.
Representing you in court.
Helping you understand whether modification may be appropriate.

The appropriate strategy depends on the facts of each case.

Speak With Weiss Ortiz About a Family Court Order Violation

If you believe your former spouse or co-parent is not following a family court order—or if you have been accused of violating one—understanding your legal options is an important first step.

Weiss Ortiz Attorneys & Mediators helps individuals and families navigate family law matters throughout Cook County, Illinois , including Chicago, La Grange Park, Oak Brook, Deerfield, and surrounding communities.

Our attorneys can review your situation and explain the legal options that may be available based on the specific circumstances of your case.

Schedule a Free Consultation

Weiss Ortiz Attorneys & Mediators
Serving Cook County, Illinois
Chicago | La Grange Park | Oak Brook | Deerfield
Phone: 773-498-4498
Website: weissortizlaw.com

This article is for general informational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice. Illinois law and court procedures can vary depending on the circumstances of a case. Reading this article does not create an attorney-client relationship.

Birth Injury Medical Malpractice in Illinois | Weiss Ortiz

Thu, 24 Sep 2026 04:13:48 GMT

When Can a Birth Injury Lead to a Medical Malpractice Claim in Illinois? Learn when a birth injury may qualify as medical malpractice in Illinois, what evidence matters, and how families can explore their legal options.

The birth of a child should be a moment of joy, but unexpected injuries during pregnancy, labor, or delivery can leave families facing difficult questions. When a newborn experiences a serious medical condition, parents may wonder whether the injury was an unavoidable complication or the result of a preventable medical error.

Not every birth injury is caused by negligence. However, when a healthcare provider fails to meet the accepted standard of medical care and that failure causes harm to a mother or child, the circumstances may warrant a medical malpractice investigation. Understanding how birth injury claims work in Illinois can help families recognize when they may have legal options and what steps they can take to protect their child’s interests.

What Is a Birth Injury?

A birth injury is physical harm or a medical condition that occurs before, during, or shortly after childbirth. Some injuries are temporary and resolve with treatment, while others may lead to long-term medical needs or developmental challenges.

Birth injuries can be associated with complications during pregnancy, labor, delivery, or newborn care. Depending on the circumstances, they may involve:

Brain injuries associated with oxygen deprivation
Nerve damage, including brachial plexus injuries
Fractures or other physical trauma during delivery
Injuries connected to delayed or improper medical intervention
Certain complications related to premature birth or inadequate monitoring

A diagnosis alone does not establish that medical malpractice occurred. Determining whether an injury was preventable requires a careful review of the medical circumstances and the care provided.

When Can a Birth Injury Be Considered Medical Malpractice?

In Illinois, a birth injury may support a medical malpractice claim when the evidence shows that a healthcare provider failed to meet the applicable standard of care and that the failure caused the injury.

Medical malpractice cases generally require establishing four key elements:

1. A Duty of Care

The healthcare provider must have had a professional responsibility to provide medical care to the mother or child. This may include obstetricians, nurses, hospitals, and other medical professionals involved in prenatal, labor, delivery, or newborn care.

2. A Breach of the Standard of Care

The provider must have acted—or failed to act—in a way that fell below the applicable medical standard of care. This assessment depends on the circumstances and generally requires qualified medical review.

3. A Connection Between the Breach and the Injury

It is not enough to show that a medical error occurred. Evidence must also establish that the breach caused or contributed to the child’s injury.

4. Resulting Damages

The injury must have resulted in legally recognized harm, which may include medical expenses, ongoing treatment needs, or other losses supported by the evidence.

Because birth injury cases can involve complex medical questions, a detailed review of the records and relevant medical evidence is often essential.

Examples of Medical Errors That May Lead to Birth Injury Claims

Certain errors during pregnancy, labor, delivery, or newborn care may raise concerns about whether appropriate medical care was provided. The specific facts matter in every case.

Failure to Monitor Fetal Distress

Healthcare providers may use fetal heart rate monitoring to assess a baby’s condition during labor. If signs of fetal distress are not properly recognized or addressed, the delay may contribute to serious harm.

Delayed or Improper Delivery Decisions

In some situations, a timely delivery—including an emergency C-section—may be medically necessary. A failure to respond appropriately to changing conditions could warrant further investigation if it results in injury.

Improper Use of Delivery Instruments

Forceps or vacuum extractors may be appropriate in certain deliveries. However, improper use or failure to consider relevant risks may contribute to physical trauma.

Failure to Recognize or Respond to Maternal Complications

Certain maternal conditions can create risks for both the mother and child. A failure to identify or appropriately manage relevant complications may raise questions about the care provided.

Inadequate Newborn Care

Medical professionals must assess and respond to a newborn’s condition after delivery. Delayed recognition or treatment of certain complications may contribute to preventable harm. These examples do not automatically establish negligence. Whether a provider’s conduct fell below the applicable standard of care depends on the medical evidence and the specific circumstances.

What Types of Birth Injuries May Have Long-Term Consequences?

Some birth injuries require only limited treatment, while others can affect a child’s health and development for years. The potential impact depends on the type and severity of the injury.

Families may face ongoing concerns involving:

Physical or motor development
Neurological complications
Long-term rehabilitation or therapy
Specialized medical care
Additional educational or support services

A child’s future medical needs may not be immediately clear after birth. When a serious injury is identified, families may benefit from understanding the diagnosis, recommended care, and whether the circumstances surrounding the injury should be reviewed.

What Evidence Is Important in an Illinois Birth Injury Case?

Medical records and expert analysis can play a significant role in evaluating a potential birth injury claim. Relevant evidence may include:

Prenatal care records
Maternal medical history
Fetal monitoring strips and labor records
Delivery and surgical reports
Newborn assessments and hospital records
Diagnostic tests and specialist evaluations
Documentation of ongoing treatment and medical expenses

A qualified medical expert may be needed to assess whether the care provided met the applicable standard and whether a breach caused or contributed to the injury.

Families should preserve available records and documentation. An attorney can help identify relevant evidence and explain the process for obtaining and reviewing medical records.

How Long Do You Have to File a Birth Injury Medical Malpractice Claim in Illinois?

Illinois has specific time limits for medical malpractice claims. Under 735 ILCS 5/13-212 , a claim generally must be filed within two years after the person bringing the claim knew, or reasonably should have known, of the injury. The statute also includes a four-year limit measured from the alleged act or omission, subject to statutory exceptions.

For a person who was under 18 when the cause of action accrued, the statute generally provides an eight-year period from the alleged act or omission, but the claim cannot be brought after that person’s 22nd birthday. The application of these rules can depend on the facts and the type of claim involved.

Because these deadlines can be complex—and claims involving a child may raise additional legal questions—families should not assume they can wait until a child is older to seek legal guidance.

What Should Parents Do If They Suspect a Birth Injury Was Preventable?

If you believe your child’s injury may have resulted from a medical error, consider taking the following steps:

Continue obtaining appropriate medical care. Your child’s health and treatment needs should remain the priority.
Keep medical records and related documents. Preserve discharge paperwork, test results, treatment plans, and other available records.
Document your child’s diagnosis and care needs. Maintain records of appointments, therapies, expenses, and recommendations from healthcare providers.
Write down questions and concerns. Note what you were told about the delivery, when the injury was identified, and any concerns you have about the care provided.
Consider a legal review. An attorney experienced in medical malpractice can help evaluate whether the available facts may support a claim and explain applicable deadlines.

You do not need to determine on your own whether malpractice occurred. A legal review, together with appropriate medical analysis, can help clarify the available options.

How Can a Medical Malpractice Attorney Help?

Birth injury cases can involve extensive medical records, multiple healthcare providers, and questions about the cause and long-term effects of an injury.

An attorney may help by reviewing the circumstances of the birth, identifying potentially responsible parties, coordinating the evaluation of medical evidence, and explaining the legal process. If a claim is supported by the evidence, legal counsel can also assess the damages that may be available under Illinois law.

Every case is different, and no particular outcome can be guaranteed. The purpose of an initial review is to better understand what happened and whether there may be a basis for pursuing a claim.

Speak With Weiss Ortiz About a Potential Birth Injury Claim If your child suffered an injury before, during, or shortly after birth and you have concerns about the medical care provided, you may have questions about your family’s legal options. Weiss Ortiz Attorneys & Mediators helps individuals and families navigate complex legal matters. Contact our team to discuss your concerns and learn whether a review of the circumstances may be appropriate.

Schedule a Free Consultation

Weiss Ortiz Attorneys & Mediators
Chicago | La Grange Park | Oak Brook | Deerfield
Phone: 773-498-4498
Website: weissortizlaw.com

What Should You Do After a Car Accident in Illinois?

Wed, 23 Sep 2026 04:00:13 GMT

Learn what to do after a car accident in Illinois, how to document your injuries, deal with insurance companies, and understand your legal options.

A car accident can happen in seconds, but its consequences may last for months or even years. From medical bills and vehicle damage to missed work and insurance disputes, an unexpected collision can create significant challenges for drivers and their families.

If you were involved in a car accident in Chicago, La Grange Park, Oak Brook, Deerfield, or elsewhere in Illinois, knowing what steps to take can help you protect your health, document important evidence, and understand your legal options.

Although every accident is different, taking appropriate steps after a crash may help you navigate the process and evaluate whether you have a personal injury claim.

What Should You Do Immediately After a Car Accident?

Your safety and the safety of others should be your first priority after a collision.

If you are involved in a car accident in Illinois, consider taking the following steps when it is safe to do so:

Move to a safe location, if possible, without leaving the scene.
Call 911 if anyone is injured or there is an emergency.
Seek medical attention for any injuries, even if they do not initially seem serious.
Exchange contact, driver’s license, vehicle, and insurance information with the other driver.
Obtain the names and contact information of witnesses.
Take photographs of the vehicles, damage, roadway, traffic signs, and visible injuries.
Avoid making assumptions or definitive statements about who caused the accident.

Illinois law requires certain crashes involving injuries, deaths, or qualifying property damage to be reported to law enforcement. If an officer does not respond, reporting requirements may still apply. The appropriate reporting process depends on the circumstances of the crash.

Why Is Medical Attention Important After a Car Accident?

Some injuries may not be immediately noticeable after a collision. Symptoms involving the neck, back, head, or other parts of the body may appear or worsen over time.

Seeking medical attention can help identify injuries and ensure that you receive appropriate care.

Medical records may also help document:

The nature and severity of your injuries
When symptoms began
The treatment you received
Recommendations for additional care
The effect of your injuries on daily activities

Follow your healthcare provider’s recommendations and keep copies of medical records, bills, prescriptions, and other treatment-related documents.

How Do You Document a Car Accident in Illinois?

Evidence can play an important role in determining how an accident occurred and evaluating a potential injury claim.

When possible, preserve information such as:

Photographs and videos of the accident scene
Vehicle damage
Road and weather conditions
Traffic signals and signs
Police reports
Witness contact information
Medical records and expenses
Receipts for accident-related costs
Records of missed work or reduced income

You may also want to keep a record of how your injuries affect your daily activities and recovery.

If nearby businesses or vehicles may have captured the collision on camera, identifying that footage promptly may be helpful because some recordings are not retained indefinitely.

Who May Be Responsible for a Car Accident?

Determining responsibility for a car accident requires examining the circumstances of the collision and the conduct of those involved. Depending on the facts, potentially responsible parties may include:

The Other Driver

A driver may be responsible if their negligence contributed to the crash. Examples may include distracted driving, speeding, failing to yield, or disregarding traffic signals.

An Employer or Vehicle Owner

In some cases, an employer or vehicle owner may also have legal responsibility, depending on the driver's relationship to them and the circumstances of the accident.

Other Potentially Responsible Parties

Certain crashes may involve additional factors, such as a vehicle defect or a dangerous roadway condition. Whether another party may be liable depends on the evidence and applicable law. An investigation can help identify the parties whose conduct may have contributed to the collision.

What If the Insurance Company Contacts You After the Accident?

After a car accident, you may receive calls or requests for information from an insurance company.

Insurance companies may investigate the crash, review medical documentation, assess property damage, and evaluate claims. However, the amount an insurer offers may not necessarily reflect the full extent of an injured person's losses.

Before accepting a settlement, it is important to understand what it covers and whether it resolves future claims related to the accident.

Keep copies of correspondence, claim documents, and settlement offers. If you are unsure about a request or offer, consider seeking legal guidance before making a decision.

Can You Recover Compensation If You Were Partly at Fault?

Illinois follows a modified comparative-fault rule in negligence-based personal injury cases.

Under Illinois law, an injured person generally cannot recover damages if their contributory fault is more than 50% of the proximate cause of the injury. If their fault is 50% or less, they may recover damages, but the amount is reduced according to their percentage of fault.

For example, if a person is found 20% responsible for a crash, their recoverable damages may be reduced by 20%.

Fault is determined based on the facts and applicable law. An insurance company's assessment is not necessarily the final determination of legal responsibility.

What Compensation May Be Available After a Car Accident?

Depending on the circumstances and evidence, an injured person may seek compensation for losses related to the accident.

Potential damages may include:

Medical expenses
Future medical care
Lost wages
Reduced earning capacity
Rehabilitation expenses
Pain and suffering
Disability or disfigurement
Other economic and non-economic losses

The types and amount of compensation available depend on factors such as the injuries, their impact, the evidence, and the legal circumstances of the claim.

How Long Do You Have to File a Car Accident Lawsuit in Illinois?

Illinois generally imposes a two-year statute of limitations for personal injury lawsuits. However, exceptions may apply, and different deadlines may govern claims involving government entities, minors, or other specific circumstances.

Property damage claims may be subject to a different deadline.

Because missing an applicable deadline can affect your ability to pursue a claim, it is important to understand which time limit applies to your situation.

When Should You Contact a Car Accident Lawyer in Illinois?

You may want to seek legal guidance if you suffered injuries, face significant medical expenses, have questions about fault, or are dealing with an insurance dispute.

A car accident attorney can review the circumstances of the collision, explain applicable legal deadlines, help identify potentially responsible parties, and evaluate the evidence related to your claim.

If you were injured in a car accident in Chicago, La Grange Park, Oak Brook, Deerfield, or elsewhere in Illinois, Weiss Ortiz Attorneys & Mediators can help you understand your legal rights and options.

Contact Weiss Ortiz Attorneys & Mediators. If you or a loved one has been injured in a car accident, our team can help you understand the next steps.
Offices: Chicago | La Grange Park | Oak Brook | Deerfield
Free consultations: 773-498-4498
Website: weissortizlaw.com

Who Is Responsible for a Pedestrian Accident in Illinois?

Wed, 16 Sep 2026 01:58:09 GMT

Learn who may be responsible for a pedestrian accident in Illinois, how right-of-way rules apply, and what evidence may support a pedestrian injury claim.

Pedestrian accidents can result in serious injuries, particularly when a person is struck by a vehicle while crossing a street, walking through a parking lot, or traveling near traffic.

When a pedestrian is injured, determining who may be legally responsible requires examining how the accident happened, whether traffic laws were followed, and whether the driver or pedestrian contributed to the collision.

Illinois law establishes specific rules regarding pedestrians' rights and duties. For example, when traffic signals are not operating or are not present, drivers generally must stop and yield to pedestrians crossing within a crosswalk under the circumstances established by Illinois law.

However, pedestrian accident cases are highly fact-specific. Understanding the applicable rules and preserving evidence after an accident can be important when evaluating a potential personal injury claim.

What Are the Most Common Causes of Pedestrian Accidents?

Pedestrian accidents can happen for many different reasons.

Common causes may include:

Distracted driving
Failure to yield the right of way
Speeding
Failure to obey traffic signals
Driving under the influence
Unsafe turns
Failing to check for pedestrians
Poor visibility
Dangerous road conditions

In some cases, more than one factor may contribute to an accident.

Do Pedestrians Have the Right of Way in Illinois?

Illinois law gives pedestrians specific rights at crosswalks.

When traffic control signals are not in place or are not operating, a driver generally must stop and yield to a pedestrian crossing within a crosswalk when the pedestrian is on the driver's half of the roadway or is approaching closely enough from the opposite half to be in danger.

Pedestrians also have legal responsibilities. For example, a pedestrian may not suddenly leave a curb or other place of safety and enter the path of a vehicle that is so close that doing so would create an immediate hazard.

Pedestrians crossing outside a marked or applicable unmarked crosswalk generally must yield to vehicles, subject to the specific rules that apply to the location and circumstances.

Because both drivers and pedestrians have legal duties, determining fault requires examining what each person did immediately before the collision.

What If the Pedestrian Was Crossing at a Crosswalk?

Crosswalks can be particularly important when determining right of way.

Illinois law generally requires drivers to yield to pedestrians crossing within a crosswalk under the circumstances described by the statute. Additionally, when a vehicle stops at a marked or applicable unmarked crosswalk to allow a pedestrian to cross, another driver approaching from behind generally may not pass the stopped vehicle.

Pedestrian-control signals can also affect the analysis. When a pedestrian signal displays "Walk" or the walking-person symbol, pedestrians facing the signal may proceed and drivers must give them the right of way.

The exact traffic signals, location, visibility, and movements of the vehicles and pedestrian can therefore become important evidence.

Can a Pedestrian Be Partly Responsible for an Accident?

Yes.

A pedestrian's actions may be considered when determining responsibility for an accident.

For example, questions may arise about whether the pedestrian:

Crossed outside a permitted crossing area
Disobeyed a traffic signal
Entered the roadway unexpectedly
Was distracted
Failed to observe approaching traffic

However, the fact that a pedestrian may have contributed to an accident does not necessarily mean that the pedestrian cannot recover compensation.

Illinois applies comparative-fault principles in personal injury cases. The amount of compensation may depend on the percentage of fault attributed to each party and the applicable legal rules.

What Evidence Can Help Prove a Pedestrian Accident Claim?

Evidence can be critical because the circumstances surrounding a pedestrian accident may be disputed.

Potentially useful evidence may include:

Police reports
Photographs of the accident scene
Traffic-camera or surveillance footage
Dashcam footage
Witness statements
Medical records
Photographs of injuries
Vehicle damage
Traffic signal information
Cellphone or other relevant records
Accident reconstruction evidence

Evidence showing the location of the pedestrian, the vehicle's position, traffic signals, lighting, and road conditions may help establish how the collision occurred.

What Injuries Can Result From a Pedestrian Accident?

Because pedestrians have little physical protection against vehicles, collisions can result in significant injuries.

Potential injuries may include:

Broken bones
Head injuries
Traumatic brain injuries
Spinal cord injuries
Internal injuries
Soft-tissue injuries
Nerve damage
Permanent disability
Disfigurement

Some injuries may require extensive medical treatment, rehabilitation, or time away from work.

What Compensation May Be Available?

Depending on the circumstances of the claim, an injured pedestrian may seek compensation for losses such as:

Medical expenses
Future medical treatment
Lost wages
Reduced earning capacity
Rehabilitation expenses
Pain and suffering
Disability
Disfigurement
Other economic and non-economic losses

The damages available in an individual case depend on the severity of the injuries, the evidence, and the specific circumstances of the accident.

What Should You Do After a Pedestrian Accident?

If you are injured in a pedestrian accident, taking steps to preserve evidence can be important.

When possible:

Seek medical attention
Report the accident
Obtain a copy of the police report
Photograph the scene and your injuries
Identify witnesses
Preserve relevant video or photographs
Keep medical records and bills
Avoid making statements about fault before understanding the circumstances

Because surveillance footage or other evidence may not be preserved indefinitely, documenting the accident promptly can be particularly important.

When Should You Speak With a Pedestrian Accident Attorney?

Pedestrian accident cases can involve questions about right of way, traffic laws, comparative fault, insurance coverage, evidence, and the severity of the injuries.

An Illinois personal injury attorney can review the circumstances of the accident, identify potentially responsible parties, evaluate available evidence, and explain your legal options.

If you or a loved one has been injured in a pedestrian accident in Illinois, Weiss Ortiz Attorneys & Mediators can help you understand your legal rights and possible options.

When Can a Property Owner Be Responsible for a Slip-and-Fall Injury in Illinois?

Sat, 29 Aug 2026 02:17:07 GMT

Learn when Illinois property owners or occupiers may be responsible for slip-and-fall injuries and what evidence may help support a premises liability claim.

A slip-and-fall accident can happen almost anywhere, including a grocery store, restaurant, apartment building, parking lot, sidewalk, or other property. While some falls may be unavoidable accidents, others may result from dangerous conditions that could have been addressed through reasonable care.

When someone is injured after slipping or tripping on another person's property, questions may arise about whether the property owner or another responsible party may be legally liable.
Illinois law generally requires property owners and occupiers to exercise reasonable care under the circumstances regarding the condition of their premises. However, an injury alone does not automatically establish liability. The specific facts surrounding the dangerous condition, the parties' responsibilities, and how the accident occurred must be evaluated.

Understanding how premises liability works in Illinois can help injured individuals better understand their potential legal options after a slip-and-fall accident.

What Is Premises Liability in Illinois?

Premises liability involves legal claims arising from injuries allegedly caused by conditions on property.
Under the Illinois Premises Liability Act, the traditional distinction between invitees and licensees has been abolished. Instead, the duty owed by an owner or occupier to entrants is generally one of reasonable care under the circumstances regarding the condition of the premises or acts done or omitted there.

Potentially dangerous conditions may include:

Wet or slippery floors
Uneven walking surfaces
Broken stairs
Damaged sidewalks
Potholes
Poorly maintained walkways
Debris or objects in walking areas
Certain ice or snow conditions
Other hazardous conditions

However, not every dangerous condition automatically creates liability. The facts must establish that the defendant owed a duty, breached that duty, and that the breach proximately caused the injury.

When May a Property Owner Be Responsible for a Slip and Fall?

A property owner or occupier may potentially be responsible when a dangerous condition causes an injury and the circumstances establish a breach of the applicable duty of reasonable care.

Depending on the facts, an important question may be whether the defendant:

Created the dangerous condition
Actually knew about the condition
Should reasonably have discovered the condition
Failed to take reasonable steps to address the hazard
Failed to provide an appropriate warning when one was required

For example, Illinois courts have considered whether a business had actual or constructive notice of a substance or other dangerous condition before a customer slipped and fell. Constructive notice generally involves circumstances showing that the condition existed long enough, or was sufficiently apparent, that the defendant should have discovered it through reasonable care.

The specific circumstances of the accident are therefore important when determining whether a premises liability claim may exist.

What Evidence Can Help Prove a Slip-and-Fall Claim?

Evidence can be especially important because conditions at an accident scene may change or disappear quickly.

Depending on the circumstances, potentially useful evidence may include:

Photographs or videos of the condition
Surveillance footage
Witness statements
Incident reports
Medical records
Maintenance or inspection records
Purchase receipts or other records showing where the accident occurred
Communications with the property owner or business
Documentation concerning previous complaints about the condition

For example, photographs showing a wet floor, damaged sidewalk, or other hazardous condition may help document what the area looked like around the time of the accident.

Evidence concerning how long a dangerous condition existed may also be important in cases involving constructive notice. Illinois courts have recognized that the duration of a condition can be relevant to whether a defendant should reasonably have discovered it.

What If the Property Owner Says the Hazard Was Not Their Fault?

A property owner, business, or insurance company may dispute responsibility for a slip-and-fall accident.

For example, the defendant may argue that:

It did not create the dangerous condition
It did not know about the condition
The condition existed for too short a time to reasonably discover it
The condition was open and obvious
The injured person was partly responsible for the accident

Illinois law recognizes that certain conditions that are known to the entrant or are open and obvious can affect the scope of an owner's duty. However, whether an open-and-obvious condition affects liability depends on the circumstances of the particular case.

Illinois also follows a modified comparative-fault system. If the injured person's contributory fault is more than 50% of the proximate cause of the injury, recovery is barred. If the person's fault is 50% or less , damages are reduced proportionally to that person's percentage of fault.

What Damages May Be Available After a Slip and Fall?

A serious slip-and-fall injury can result in medical expenses, time away from work, and other physical and financial consequences.
Depending on the circumstances of the claim, potential damages may include:

Medical expenses
Future medical treatment
Lost income
Reduced earning capacity
Rehabilitation expenses
Pain and suffering
Disability
Disfigurement
Other economic and non-economic losses

Illinois law recognizes economic damages such as medical expenses and lost income, as well as non-economic damages such as pain and suffering, disability, disfigurement, loss of consortium, and loss of society.

The damages available in an individual case depend on the nature and severity of the injuries, the evidence, and the circumstances of the claim.

Why Is It Important to Document a Slip-and-Fall Accident?

Documenting an accident as soon as possible may help preserve evidence that could later become relevant to a premises liability claim.
When possible, an injured person may want to:

Take photographs of the area and dangerous condition
Identify potential witnesses
Report the accident to the property owner or business
Keep medical records and bills
Preserve relevant communications
Keep photographs or videos related to the accident
Avoid altering or disposing of the product or object involved in the accident, when applicable

Prompt documentation can be particularly useful when the condition that allegedly caused the fall is temporary, such as a liquid spill or another condition that may be cleaned or repaired shortly afterward.

Can a Slip-and-Fall Claim Involve More Than One Responsible Party?

Yes. Depending on the circumstances, more than one person or entity may potentially have legal responsibility for an injury.

For example, questions may arise regarding:

The property owner
A business operating on the property
A property management company
A maintenance company
Another party responsible for creating or addressing the dangerous condition

Determining who owned, occupied, controlled, or maintained the area where the accident occurred can therefore be an important part of investigating a claim.

When Should You Speak With a Personal Injury Attorney?

Slip-and-fall cases can involve questions about the condition of the property, notice, reasonable care, comparative fault, evidence, and damages.

An Illinois personal injury attorney can review the circumstances of an accident, help identify potentially responsible parties, evaluate available evidence, and explain the legal options that may apply.

If you were injured after slipping or falling on someone else's property in Illinois, Weiss Ortiz Attorneys & Mediators can help you understand your legal rights and possible options.

Who Can File a Wrongful Death Lawsuit in Illinois?

Sat, 15 Aug 2026 02:03:31 GMT

Learn who may file a wrongful death lawsuit in Illinois, who may receive compensation, and what damages families may recover after losing a loved one because of negligence.

Losing a loved one because of someone else's negligence is one of the most devastating experiences a family can face. In addition to emotional grief, families often encounter unexpected financial challenges, medical expenses, and uncertainty about their legal rights.

Illinois law allows certain wrongful death claims when a person's death was caused by another party's negligent, reckless, or wrongful conduct. While no lawsuit can replace a loved one, a wrongful death claim may help surviving family members pursue financial compensation and accountability.

Understanding who may file a wrongful death lawsuit and how these claims work is an important first step for families seeking answers.

What Is a Wrongful Death Claim?

A wrongful death claim is a civil lawsuit brought when a person's death results from another party's negligence or wrongful actions.

Unlike criminal cases, which seek criminal penalties, wrongful death lawsuits focus on obtaining financial compensation for surviving family members who have suffered losses because of the death.

A wrongful death claim may arise from situations involving:

Negligence
Careless conduct
Medical errors
Unsafe property conditions
Defective products
Motor vehicle accidents

Each case depends on its own facts and the available evidence.

Who Can File the Lawsuit?

Under Illinois law, a wrongful death lawsuit is generally filed by the personal representative of the deceased person's estate.

The personal representative may have been:

Named in the deceased person's will
Appointed by the probate court if no representative was previously designated

Although the representative files the lawsuit, the claim is typically brought on behalf of eligible surviving family members.

Because these cases involve specific legal procedures, families often benefit from speaking with an experienced wrongful death attorney early in the process.

Who May Receive Compensation?

Compensation recovered in a wrongful death case is generally intended to benefit certain surviving family members.

Depending on the circumstances, eligible beneficiaries may include:

A surviving spouse
Children
Other next of kin, as provided under Illinois law

The court may determine how compensation is distributed based on each family's situation.

Every case is unique, and eligibility may vary depending on the family structure and applicable law.

What Types of Accidents Can Lead to Wrongful Death Claims?

Wrongful death claims may arise from many different types of accidents and incidents.

Car Accidents

Fatal crashes caused by distracted driving, speeding, impaired driving, or other negligent behavior may result in wrongful death claims.

Truck Accidents

Commercial truck accidents often involve catastrophic injuries and may raise complex questions regarding driver negligence, trucking companies, maintenance providers, or other responsible parties.

Medical Malpractice

A wrongful death claim may arise when a healthcare provider's negligence contributes to a patient's death.

Examples may include:

Surgical errors
Misdiagnosis
Delayed diagnosis
Medication errors
Birth-related medical negligence

Workplace Accidents

Fatal workplace incidents involving unsafe conditions, defective equipment, or third-party negligence may also give rise to wrongful death claims in certain circumstances.

Other situations may include construction accidents, nursing home negligence, defective products, or dangerous property conditions.

What Damages May Be Available?

The damages available in a wrongful death claim depend on the specific circumstances of each case.

Compensation may include:

Funeral and burial expenses
Medical expenses related to the final injury or illness
Loss of financial support
Loss of future income
Loss of companionship
Loss of guidance and care
Grief and mental suffering, where permitted under Illinois law

The value of a wrongful death claim depends on many factors, including the deceased person's age, earning capacity, family relationships, and the financial impact of the loss.

How Long Do Families Have to File?

Illinois law generally limits the amount of time families have to file a wrongful death lawsuit.

In many cases, wrongful death claims must be filed within two years of the date of death. However, important exceptions may apply depending on the circumstances.

For example, different deadlines may exist in cases involving:

Medical malpractice
Government entities
Minors
Certain delayed discovery situations

Because filing deadlines can vary, waiting too long may affect a family's ability to pursue compensation.

Consulting with an attorney as soon as possible may help preserve important evidence and ensure that all applicable legal deadlines are met.

Why Legal Guidance Is Important

Wrongful death cases often involve complex legal, medical, and financial issues. Investigating the cause of death, identifying responsible parties, and calculating damages may require substantial evidence and expert analysis.

An experienced Illinois wrongful death attorney can help families understand their legal rights, explain the claims process, and advocate on their behalf during a difficult time.

If you have lost a loved one because of someone else's negligence in Illinois, the personal injury team at Weiss Ortiz Attorneys & Mediators can help you understand your legal rights and discuss your possible legal options.

Who Is Responsible for Dangerous Products in Illinois?

Sat, 15 Aug 2026 01:51:14 GMT

Learn how Illinois product liability laws may protect consumers injured by defective or dangerous products and who may be held responsible for resulting injuries.

Consumers trust that the products they purchase are reasonably safe when used as intended. Unfortunately, defective or dangerous products can sometimes cause serious injuries, leading to unexpected medical expenses, lost income, and long-term physical consequences.

Illinois product liability laws allow injured consumers to seek compensation in certain situations when a defective product causes harm. A recent Illinois legal update involving Zurbriggen v. Twin Hill Acquisition (June 2026) has renewed attention on product liability claims and the responsibilities of companies involved in manufacturing and selling consumer products.

Understanding who may be responsible for a dangerous product can help injured individuals better protect their legal rights.

What Is Product Liability?

Product liability is an area of law that addresses injuries caused by defective or unreasonably dangerous products.

A product liability claim may arise when a product causes injury because of issues involving:

Defective design
Manufacturing defects
Inadequate warnings or instructions
Unsafe product labeling

Unlike many other personal injury claims, product liability cases often involve technical evidence and multiple parties throughout the product's distribution chain.

The specific legal requirements depend on the facts of each case and the applicable Illinois law.

Who May Be Responsible?

Several different parties may potentially be responsible when a dangerous product causes an injury.

Manufacturer

The company that designed or manufactured the product may be held responsible if a defect existed during production or design.

Examples may include:

Design flaws
Manufacturing errors
Failure to conduct adequate safety testing

Distributor

A distributor involved in transporting or supplying defective products may also become part of a product liability claim under certain circumstances.

Distributors play an important role in moving products through the supply chain before they reach consumers.

Retailer

In some situations, the business that sold the product may also face liability depending on the facts of the case and Illinois law.

Retailers may become involved even if they did not manufacture the product themselves.

Because several companies may participate in bringing a product to market, determining responsibility often requires a careful investigation.

Common Examples of Product Liability Cases

Dangerous products can appear in many different forms.

Some common examples include:

Defective Vehicles

Vehicle defects involving brakes, airbags, steering systems, tires, or other components may contribute to serious accidents.

Household Appliances

Faulty electrical appliances, defective batteries, space heaters, and kitchen equipment may create fire, burn, or electrical hazards.

Children's Products

Unsafe toys, cribs, car seats, strollers, and other children's products may place young children at risk of serious injury.

Medical Devices

Defective medical devices, surgical implants, or other healthcare products may lead to additional medical complications requiring further treatment.

Product liability claims may also involve defective industrial equipment, construction materials, pharmaceuticals, and consumer electronics.

What Evidence Helps a Product Liability Claim?

Strong evidence is often essential in a product liability case.

Helpful evidence may include:

The defective product itself
Photographs of the product and injuries
Medical records
Purchase receipts
Product packaging and instruction manuals
Recall notices
Witness statements
Expert opinions
Maintenance or repair records

Whenever possible, injured individuals should avoid altering or discarding the product after an accident, as preserving the product may become important during the investigation.

Documentation connecting the injury to the defective product may also strengthen a claim.

What Compensation May Be Available?

Depending on the circumstances, a successful product liability claim may include compensation for various losses.

Potential damages may include:

Medical expenses
Future medical treatment
Lost wages
Reduced earning capacity
Pain and suffering
Emotional distress
Permanent disability
Rehabilitation expenses
Property damage, when applicable

The amount of compensation available depends on many factors, including the severity of the injuries, the available evidence, and the extent of the financial and personal losses.

Every case is unique, and no outcome can be guaranteed.

Why Legal Guidance Matters in Product Liability Cases

Product liability claims often involve large manufacturers, insurance companies, technical experts, and complex legal issues.

Determining who may be legally responsible requires a detailed investigation of how the product was designed, manufactured, distributed, and used.

An experienced Illinois personal injury attorney can help evaluate the facts of your case, preserve important evidence, and explain your legal options.

If you or a loved one has been injured by a defective or dangerous product in Illinois, the personal injury team at Weiss Ortiz Attorneys & Mediators can help you understand your rights and possible legal options.

When Can Child Support Be Modified in Illinois?

Sat, 15 Aug 2026 01:35:06 GMT

Learn when child support may be modified in Illinois and which changes in circumstances could affect an existing child support order.

Child support orders are designed to reflect a family's financial circumstances at the time they are entered. However, life can change significantly after a divorce or parentage case is finalized. A parent may lose a job, receive a promotion, experience health issues, or see changes in parenting time that affect the original support arrangement.

Under Illinois law, child support orders may be modified when certain legal requirements are met. A recent Illinois appellate court decision, In re Marriage of Vanduyne (June 2026), highlights the importance of following the proper legal process when seeking a modification.

If your financial situation or parenting arrangement has changed, understanding how Illinois courts evaluate child support modification requests may help you determine your next steps.

What Counts as a Significant Change?

Not every change will justify modifying child support. Generally, the court looks for a substantial change in circumstances before considering a modification.

Examples may include:

Changes in Income

A significant increase or decrease in either parent's income may affect child support calculations.

This could result from:

Job loss
Promotion
Salary reduction
Disability
Retirement
Self-employment income changes

Changes in Parenting Time

If the parenting schedule changes substantially, the number of overnights each parent has may affect child support calculations.

Changes to shared parenting arrangements may sometimes justify a review of an existing support order.

Employment Changes

A parent who changes careers, becomes unemployed, or returns to work after an extended absence may experience financial changes that affect support obligations.

Courts typically examine whether employment changes are temporary or long-term.

Medical Issues

Serious medical conditions affecting either a parent or the child may also influence child support.

Examples include:

Long-term illness
Disability
Increased medical expenses
Special healthcare needs
Ongoing treatment costs

Every case is evaluated based on its own facts, and no single factor automatically guarantees a modification.

How Do Courts Review Modification Requests?

When reviewing a request to modify child support, Illinois courts generally consider the totality of the circumstances.

Depending on the case, the court may review:

Each parent's current income
Parenting time arrangements
Childcare expenses
Health insurance costs
Educational expenses
Medical needs of the child
Other relevant financial information

The parent requesting the modification typically has the responsibility of showing that a substantial change has occurred.

Courts may also review updated financial documents and other evidence before deciding whether a modification is appropriate.

What Happens If Someone Stops Paying Child Support?

A parent should not stop paying child support simply because financial circumstances have changed.

Until the court approves a modification, the existing child support order remains in effect.

Failure to comply with a court order may result in enforcement actions, including:

Collection of past-due support
Wage garnishment
Suspension of certain licenses
Interest on unpaid child support
Other legal remedies authorized under Illinois law

Parents experiencing financial hardship should consider requesting a modification as soon as possible rather than allowing unpaid support to accumulate.

Why Legal Guidance Matters in Child Support Modification Cases

Child support modification cases often involve changing financial circumstances, updated parenting schedules, and evolving family needs.

An experienced Illinois family law attorney can help evaluate whether a substantial change in circumstances may support a modification request and guide parents through the legal process.

Whether you are seeking to increase, reduce, or review an existing child support order, understanding your legal rights is an important first step.

If you have questions about child support, parenting time, or modifying a child support order in Illinois, the family law team at Weiss Ortiz Attorneys & Mediators can help you understand your legal options.

Are Prenuptial Agreements Enforceable in Illinois?

Sat, 15 Aug 2026 01:24:03 GMT

Learn when Illinois courts may enforce prenuptial agreements and what factors could affect their validity during divorce

Many couples choose to sign a prenuptial agreement before getting married to clarify how property, debts, and financial matters will be handled if the marriage ends in divorce. While these agreements can provide certainty and reduce future disputes, they are not automatically enforceable in every situation.

A recent Illinois appellate decision, In re Marriage of Escamilla, issued in May 2026, highlights the importance of carefully preparing and reviewing prenuptial agreements under Illinois law.

Understanding how Illinois courts evaluate these agreements can help couples make informed decisions before and during marriage.

What Is a Prenuptial Agreement?

A prenuptial agreement, often called a prenup , is a legal contract signed by two people before they marry.

A prenup may address issues such as:

Division of property
Marital and non-marital assets
Responsibility for debts
Business ownership interests
Inheritance rights
Spousal maintenance (alimony) under certain circumstances

Many couples use prenuptial agreements to establish financial expectations and reduce uncertainty if the marriage later ends in divorce.

Although some people believe prenups are only for wealthy individuals, they can benefit couples with businesses, retirement accounts, children from previous relationships, significant assets, or anticipated future earnings.

When Can a Prenup Be Challenged?

Not every prenuptial agreement will automatically be enforced by an Illinois court.

A spouse may challenge a prenup for several reasons, depending on the facts of the case.

Some common issues include:

Lack of voluntary consent
Failure to fully disclose assets or debts
Fraud or misrepresentation
Duress or coercion
Unconscionable or extremely unfair terms under certain circumstances

Courts generally examine whether both parties entered into the agreement knowingly and voluntarily before deciding whether it should be enforced.

Each case is unique, and the outcome depends on the specific facts and applicable Illinois law.

How Do Illinois Courts Review Prenuptial Agreements?

Illinois courts typically review several factors when determining whether a prenuptial agreement is enforceable.

These may include:

Whether both parties signed voluntarily
Whether each party had an opportunity to review the agreement
Whether financial information was adequately disclosed
Whether the agreement complies with Illinois law
The circumstances surrounding the execution of the agreement

The recent In re Marriage of Escamilla decision serves as another reminder that courts carefully evaluate prenuptial agreements rather than automatically enforcing every provision.

Proper drafting and legal review before signing can help reduce future disputes.

Can a Prenup Affect Property Division?

Yes. One of the primary purposes of a prenuptial agreement is to establish how certain property will be treated if the marriage ends.

A prenup may specify:

Which assets remain separate property
How marital property will be divided
Ownership of real estate
Investment accounts
Retirement assets
Business interests
Future appreciation of certain assets

Without a valid prenuptial agreement, Illinois courts generally divide marital property according to the state's equitable distribution laws.

A properly drafted prenup may provide greater certainty regarding financial expectations during divorce proceedings.

Can a Prenup Affect Spousal Support?

In some situations, yes.

A prenuptial agreement may include provisions regardi ng spousal maintenance, a lso known as alimony.

For example, the agreement may address:

Whether maintenance will be paid
The amount of support
The duration of payments
Circumstances under which maintenance may end

However, Illinois courts may review these provisions to determine whether they comply with state law and whether enforcement would be appropriate under the circumstances.

Not every maintenance provision will automatically be upheld simply because it appears in a prenup.

Why Legal Guidance Matters When Creating a Prenup

A prenuptial agreement is intended to provide clarity and reduce conflict, but only if it is properly prepared.

Working with an experienced Illinois family law attorney before signing a prenup may help ensure that:

The agreement complies with Illinois law
Financial disclosures are complete
The terms accurately reflect the parties' intentions
Potential future disputes are minimized

Careful planning before marriage can provide greater peace of mind and help protect both parties' financial interests.

If you have questions about prenuptial agreements, divorce, property division, or spousal maintenance in Illinois, the family law team at Weiss Ortiz Attorneys & Mediators can help you understand your legal rights and options.

Can Military Disability Benefits Be Divided During Divorce in Illinois?

Sat, 15 Aug 2026 01:13:09 GMT

Learn how military disability benefits, VA benefits, Social Security, and other federal benefits may affect property division during an Illinois divorce.

Dividing assets during a divorce can become complicated, especially when one spouse receives federal benefits such as military disability payments, Veterans Affairs (VA) benefits, Social Security benefits, or other protected federal payments.

In Illinois divorce cases, courts generally follow the principle of equitable distribution, meaning marital property is divided fairly based on the circumstances of the case. However, certain federal benefits are subject to specific protections that may limit whether they can be divided by state courts.

A recent Illinois Supreme Court decisi on, In re Marriage of Tronsrue (2025 IL 130596), addressed important questions regarding how certain federal benefits may be treated during divorce proceedings.

Understanding how federal benefits interact with Illinois divorce laws can help spouses better prepare for property division discussions and financial planning.

What Is Considered Marital Property in Illinois?

In Illinois, marital property generally includes assets and income acquired during the marriage, regardless of whose name appears on the account or title.

Examples of marital property may include:

Real estate purchased during the marriage
Bank accounts
Investments
Retirement accounts
Pension benefits
Other assets accumulated during the marriage

Illinois courts use equitable distribution when dividing marital property. This means a court considers multiple factors to determine a fair division rather than automatically splitting assets equally.

However, not every asset or payment received by a spouse can be treated as marital property.

Certain federal benefits are governed by federal law and may have restrictions on how they can be handled in a divorce.

Can Military Disability Benefits Be Divided in an Illinois Divorce?

Generally, certain military disability benefits cannot be directly divided as marital property in an Illinois divorce because federal law provides protections for these payments.

Military disability benefits and certain Veterans Affairs (VA) disability benefits are treated differently from traditional retirement benefits.

This means a divorce court may not always have authority to divide these benefits between spouses.

However, the presence of disability benefits may still be relevant when evaluating the overall financial circumstances of each spouse.

For example, courts may consider financial resources and income sources when addressing other divorce-related issues.

What Did In re Marriage of Tronsrue Clarify?

The Illinois Supr eme Court case In re Marriage of Tronsrue, 2025 IL 130596, examined the relationship between federal protections and Illinois divorce proceedings.

The decision highlighted that some federal payments cannot be divided by state courts because federal law limits the authority of state courts over certain benefits.

The case reinforces the importance of understanding the difference between:

Benefits that may be considered marital property
Benefits protected from direct division
Financial resources that may still affect divorce negotiations

Because federal benefits involve complex legal rules, each divorce case requires an individual analysis based on the type of benefit involved and the circumstances of the spouses.

Which Federal Benefits Usually Cannot Be Divided?

Certain federal benefits may have restrictions that prevent them from being directly divided during an Illinois divorce.

These may include:

VA Disability Benefits

Benefits provided through the Department of Veterans Affairs generally receive federal protection from division in divorce proceedings.

Military Disability Retirement Benefits

Military disability payments may also have protections that limit how state courts can divide them.

Social Security Benefits

Social Security benefits are governed by federal law and generally cannot be divided as marital property by state divorce courts.

Certain Railroad Retirement Benefits

Some railroad retirement benefits may also receive federal protections that affect how they are treated during divorce.

The rules surrounding these benefits can be complicated, and the outcome may depend on the specific type of payment involved.

Can These Benefits Still Affect Divorce Negotiations?

Yes. Even when certain federal benefits cannot be divided directly, they may still play a role in divorce negotiations.

For example, spouses may need to consider:

Each spouse’s overall financial resources
Income differences
Retirement planning
Future financial needs
Other marital assets available for division

Understanding the complete financial picture can help spouses negotiate property division agreements and develop realistic long-term plans after divorce.

How Can a Divorce Attorney Help With Federal Benefits and Property Division?

Divorce cases involving military benefits, VA benefits, pensions, or other federal payments can involve complicated state and federal laws.

An experienced Illinois divorce attorney can help evaluate:

Which assets may be considered marital property
Which benefits may have federal protections
How benefits may affect negotiations
What options may be available during divorce proceedings

Careful legal analysis can help protect your financial interests during the divorce process.

If you are facing a divorce involving military benefits, federal benefits, pensions, or complex property division issu es in Illinois, Weiss Ortiz Attorneys & Mediators can help yo u understand your legal rights and options.

Can Social Media Hurt Your Personal Injury Case in Illinois?

Wed, 08 Jul 2026 03:16:43 GMT

Learn how social media activity may affect a personal injury claim in Illinois and why online posts can sometimes be used during accident cases.

After an accident, many people continue using social media the same way they normally would. Posting photos, sharing updates, checking into locations, or uploading videos may feel harmless during recovery.

However, online activity can sometimes become part of a personal injury investigation.

Insurance companies and defense attorneys often review social media accounts while evaluating accident claims. In some situations, posts, comments, photos, or videos may be used as evidence during settlement negotiations or litigation.

Understanding how social media may affect a personal injury case in Illinois can help injured individuals avoid unnecessary complications while a claim remains active.

Why Social Media Matters in Personal Injury Cases

Social media can become relevant in personal injury cases because insurance companies often investigate claims carefully before offering compensation.

Online activity may affect issues such as:

credibility
evidence gathering
consistency with injury claims

For example, if someone claims serious physical limitations after an accident but later posts content showing physically demanding activities, insurance companies may attempt to use that information to challenge the claim.

Even posts that seem unrelated to the accident may sometimes be interpreted differently during litigation.

In many cases, investigators look for inconsistencies between:

medical records
reported injuries
public statements
online activity

Because of this, social media content may become part of the overall evaluation of a case.

What Types of Posts May Raise Concerns?

Certain types of social media content may attract attention during a personal injury claim.

Examples may include:

gym photos
workout videos
vacation posts
dancing videos
sports activities
travel content
physically demanding recreational activities
captions suggesting someone is “feeling great”

For instance, a simple photo at a social event may be interpreted differently if an individual is claiming significant physical pain or mobility limitations.

This does not necessarily mean the claim is invalid, but insurance companies may still attempt to use online content to dispute the severity of injuries.

Photos and videos are often viewed without full context, which can sometimes create misunderstandings during a case.

Can Deleted Posts Still Be Found?

In some situations, yes.

Many people assume deleting a post completely removes it from consideration. However, deleted content may still exist in other forms.

Potential sources may include:

screenshots
archived content
shared posts
saved images
cached data

During the discovery process in litigation, certain digital information may also become relevant if it relates directly to the case.

Because of this, attempting to quickly remove content after an accident may not always eliminate concerns related to online activity.

Can Private Accounts Still Be Reviewed?

Private accounts are not always completely protected from review.

Depending on the circumstances, social media content may still become accessible through:

mutual connections
tagged posts
shared screenshots
public comments
subpoenas in some cases

Friends or family members may also unintentionally share photos or information connected to an accident victim’s activities.

Additionally, tagged content from third parties may appear publicly even if a person’s own account settings are private.

For these reasons, privacy settings alone may not fully prevent online activity from becoming part of a personal injury case.

Should You Stop Using Social Media Completely?

Not necessarily.

Many attorneys simply recommend being cautious while a personal injury claim is ongoing.

Some general recommendations may include:

avoid discussing the accident online
avoid posting about injuries or settlements
avoid misleading activity posts
review privacy settings carefully
think carefully before posting photos or videos

Injured individuals do not automatically need to disappear from social media, but understanding how online activity may be interpreted can help reduce unnecessary risks during a claim.

What Else Can Affect an Injury Claim?

Social media is only one factor that may affect a personal injury case.

Insurance companies may also review:

medical records
recorded statements
surveillance footage
witness statements
employment records
inconsistencies in documentation

Because multiple forms of evidence may be examined together, consistency often becomes important throughout the claims process.

Accurate medical documentation and clear communication may help support the credibility of an injury claim.

Personal injury claims can involve complicated legal and insurance issues, especially when online activity becomes part of the investigation.

If you were injured in an accident in Illinois, Weiss Ortiz Attorneys & Mediators can help you understand your legal rights and options.

What Damages Can You Recover After a Personal Injury Accident in Illinois?

Mon, 29 Jun 2026 23:57:55 GMT

Learn what types of compensation may be available after an accident in Illinois, including medical expenses, lost wages, pain and suffering, and property damage.

After an accident, many injured individuals focus only on immediate expenses like emergency medical bills or vehicle repairs. However, personal injury claims may involve a much broader range of damages depending on the circumstances of the case.

In many situations, compensation may extend beyond short-term financial losses and include long-term physical, emotional, and financial impacts.

Every accident case is different, and the amount of compensation available may depend on factors such as the severity of the injuries, the available evidence, and the effect the accident has on a person’s daily life.

Understanding the types of damages that may be available after an accident in Illinois can help injury victims better protect their legal rights.

What Are “Damages” in a Personal Injury Case?

In a personal injury case, “damages” generally refer to the financial compensation an injured person may seek after an accident caused by another party’s negligence or wrongful conduct.

Damages are often divided into two broad categories:

economic damages
non-economic damages

Economic damages typically involve measurable financial losses, while non-economic damages relate to the physical and emotional impact of an injury.

The purpose of compensation is to help address the losses caused by the accident and support the injured person’s recovery and future needs.

Medical Expenses

Medical expenses are often one of the largest components of a personal injury claim.

Depending on the severity of the injuries, compensation may include:

emergency room treatment
surgeries
hospitalization
rehabilitation services
medications
physical therapy
specialist appointments
future medical treatment

Some injuries may require ongoing care long after the accident occurs. In serious cases, future medical expenses can become a significant issue during settlement negotiations. Medical documentation often plays an important role when evaluating these damages.

Lost Wages and Reduced Earning Capacity

Many accident victims are unable to work while recovering from their injuries.

In some cases, damages may include compensation for:

missed workdays
lost income
reduced earning opportunities
diminished earning capacity

More serious injuries may prevent a person from returning to the same type of job or working the same number of hours as before the accident.

Long-term physical limitations, chronic pain, or permanent disabilities may also affect future employment opportunities and earning potential.

Because these financial losses can continue for years, they may significantly affect the value of a personal injury claim.

Pain and Suffering

Pain and suffering damages are often one of the most discussed aspects of a personal injury case.

Unlike medical bills or lost wages, these damages are not always tied to exact dollar amounts. Instead, they may relate to the overall physical and emotional impact of the injury.

Pain and suffering may include:

physical pain
emotional distress
anxiety
depression
sleep disturbances
loss of enjoyment of life

Serious injuries can affect relationships, hobbies, mental health, and everyday activities. In some cases, the emotional impact of an accident may continue long after physical injuries begin healing.

Property Damage

Accidents often involve damage to personal property in addition to physical injuries.

Property damage claims may include compensation for:

vehicle repairs
replacement costs
damaged electronics
personal belongings destroyed during the accident

The extent of the damage and repair estimates may influence how these claims are evaluated. In motor vehicle accidents, insurance companies often assess the cost of repairs compared to the total value of the vehicle when determining compensation.

Can Future Damages Be Included?

Yes. In some situations, future damages may become an important part of a personal injury claim.

Certain injuries may require:

future medical care
long-term rehabilitation
ongoing treatment
home modifications
permanent disability accommodations
future lost income

For example, a person suffering from a serious spinal injury or traumatic brain injury may face long-term medical and financial challenges that extend far beyond the initial accident. Future damages may be especially important in cases involving permanent limitations or chronic conditions.

What Factors Affect the Value of a Case?

Several factors may influence the potential value of a personal injury claim.

Some common considerations include:

the severity of the injuries
available evidence
medical documentation
insurance coverage limits
liability disputes
long-term effects on daily life

Cases involving permanent injuries, extended treatment, or significant financial losses may involve higher compensation demands than cases involving minor injuries. However, every situation is unique, and no two cases are exactly alike.

Why Documentation Matters After an Accident

Proper documentation can play a major role in strengthening a personal injury claim.

Important evidence may include:

photos and videos
medical records
witness statements
police reports
receipts and financial records
proof of lost wages

Insurance companies often review evidence carefully when evaluating claims. Missing records or inconsistent information may create challenges during settlement negotiations.

Preserving evidence early may help protect an injured person’s rights and improve the ability to document damages accurately.

Personal injury cases can involve complex medical, financial, and legal issues. If you were injured in an accident in Illinois, Weiss Ortiz Attorneys & Mediators can help you understand your rights and possible legal options.

What Evidence Helps a Personal Injury Case in Illinois?

Tue, 23 Jun 2026 00:36:00 GMT

Learn what types of evidence may strengthen a personal injury claim in Illinois, including medical records, photos, witness statements, and accident reports.

After an accident, many people focus on immediate concerns like medical treatment, vehicle repairs, or missing work. However, the evidence collected after an injury can play a major role in the outcome of a personal injury claim. Strong documentation may affect:

settlement negotiations
insurance investigations
liability disputes
compensation claims

Insurance companies often review evidence carefully when evaluating accident claims. Inconsistent information, missing records, or limited documentation may create challenges during the claims process.

Understanding what evidence may help support a personal injury case in Illinois can help accident victims better protect their rights after an injury.

Why Evidence Matters in a Personal Injury Claim

Evidence is one of the most important parts of a personal injury case.

In many situations, injured individuals must show:

how the accident happened
who may have been responsible
how the injuries affected their health and daily life

Evidence may help establish liability by demonstrating dangerous conditions, negligent behavior, or unsafe actions that contributed to the accident.

It may also help prove damages, including medical expenses, lost wages, pain and suffering, and long-term physical limitations.

Another important issue is connecting the injuries directly to the accident. Insurance companies may question whether injuries existed before the incident or whether they were caused by something unrelated. Proper evidence may help strengthen that connection.

Photos and Videos Can Be Important

Photos and videos can provide valuable documentation after an accident.

In many cases, visual evidence may help preserve details that could disappear shortly after the incident occurs.

Helpful images may include:

the accident scene
visible injuries
weather conditions
hazardous property conditions
vehicle damage
road conditions
traffic signs or signals

For example, in a slip and fall case, photos of wet floors, broken stairs, poor lighting, or unsafe walkways may become important later during the claims process.

In car accident cases, pictures showing vehicle damage, skid marks, debris, or intersection conditions may also help support the claim. The earlier evidence is preserved, the more useful it may become later.

Medical Records Often Play a Major Role

Medical records are often some of the most important evidence in a personal injury case.

These records may help document:

diagnoses
treatment timelines
physician recommendations
medications
rehabilitation plans
long-term injuries

Consistency in medical treatment can also become important. Delays in treatment or large gaps between appointments may sometimes create questions during insurance reviews.

Medical bills and treatment records may also help demonstrate the financial impact of the injury.

In cases involving serious or permanent injuries, medical documentation may become especially important when evaluating future treatment needs or long-term limitations.

Witness Statements May Support Your Case

Witnesses may help strengthen a personal injury claim by providing independent observations about the accident. Neutral witnesses can sometimes support:

how the accident occurred
road or property conditions
unsafe behavior
visibility or weather issues

After an accident, obtaining witness contact information may be helpful if statements are needed later.

Written statements, recorded interviews, or testimony may all become relevant depending on the circumstances of the case. Because memories can fade over time, early documentation is often important.

Police Reports and Incident Reports

Official reports may also play a significant role in personal injury cases. Depending on the type of accident, these documents may include:

police crash reports
workplace incident reports
store or property incident documentation

These reports may contain information about:

involved parties
witness names
scene descriptions
preliminary findings
observations from responding personnel

Although reports do not automatically determine liability, they may still become important pieces of evidence during settlement negotiations or litigation.

Can Social Media Affect a Personal Injury Case?

Yes. Social media activity can sometimes affect a personal injury claim.

Insurance companies and defense attorneys may review online activity during investigations. Photos, videos, comments, captions, and location check-ins may all become relevant depending on the circumstances.

For example, posts showing physically demanding activities, travel, sports, or recreational events may sometimes be used to challenge claims involving serious injuries or physical limitations.

Even seemingly harmless content may be interpreted differently during litigation. For this reason, many attorneys recommend being cautious about discussing accidents or injuries online while a case remains active.

What Should You Do After an Accident?

The steps taken after an accident may affect both your health and your potential claim. Some important actions may include:

seek medical attention as soon as possible
take photos and videos of the scene
preserve medical and financial records
obtain witness contact information
avoid admitting fault at the scene
report the accident when appropriate
speak with an attorney before accepting certain settlements

Early documentation may help preserve evidence before important details disappear.Personal injury claims can involve complicated insurance issues, medical documentation, and legal questions.

If you were injured in an accident in Illinois, Weiss Ortiz Attorneys & Mediators can help you understand your rights and legal options.

Who Pays for College After Divorce in Illinois?

Fri, 19 Jun 2026 23:39:27 GMT

Many divorced parents assume that financial obligations automatically end once a child turns 18. However, college expenses can become a major source of conflict long after a divorce is finalized.

In Illinois, courts may have the authority to order parents to contribute to certain higher education expenses for their children, even after the child becomes a legal adult.

As tuition costs continue rising and student loan burdens remain a growing concern for families, understanding how Illinois law handles college expenses after divorce has become increasingly important.

Can Illinois Courts Order Parents to Pay College Expenses?

Yes. Illinois law may allow courts to require divorced parents to contribute to certain college-related expenses.

Under Section 513 of the Illinois Marriage and Dissolution of Marriage Act, courts may enter contribution orders for post-secondary educational expenses in qualifying cases.

This means a judge may determine that one or both parents should help pay for certain educational costs depending on the circumstances of the family.

These contribution orders may apply even years after a divorce judgment has been entered, which often surprises many parents.

The purpose of the law is to help courts evaluate how educational expenses should be shared fairly between parents while considering the financial realities of the family.

What College Expenses May Be Included?

College expenses can extend far beyond tuition alone. Depending on the situation, courts may consider several types of educational costs, including:

tuition
room and board
books and educational materials
mandatory school fees
transportation expenses
certain health insurance costs in some situations

The exact expenses included may vary depending on the child’s school, financial circumstances, and the details of the case.

Because college costs can increase significantly over time, disagreements about these expenses are common in post-divorce disputes.

What Factors Does the Court Consider?

Illinois courts typically examine several factors when determining whether parents should contribute to college expenses and how those costs should be divided. Some important considerations may include:

each parent’s financial resources
the standard of living the child would likely have experienced if the marriage had not ended
the child’s academic performance
scholarships and financial aid
the student’s own income, savings, or financial resources

Courts may also consider the reasonableness of the educational expenses and whether the costs create an excessive financial burden on either parent. Every case is unique, and no single factor automatically determines the outcome.

Can Parents Reach Their Own Agreement?

Yes. Many parents choose to negotiate college expense arrangements outside of court.

Settlement agreements and mediation may allow parents to create more flexible solutions tailored to their family’s needs. Parents may agree on issues such as:

how tuition will be divided
limits on expenses
academic requirements
timelines for contribution
student responsibilities

Negotiated agreements may also help families avoid lengthy litigation and reduce conflict during already stressful situations. Mediation can be especially valuable when parents want to maintain productive co-parenting relationships while addressing future educational costs.

What Happens if a Parent Refuses to Pay?

Disputes sometimes arise when one parent refuses to contribute to educational expenses after a court order or agreement is already in place.

In these situations, enforcement issues may arise, and the other parent may seek court intervention.

Depending on the circumstances, courts may:

enforce existing contribution orders
review compliance with agreements
consider modification requests
evaluate changes in financial circumstances

If a parent experiences a substantial financial change, they may also request modifications related to educational expense obligations.

Because these disputes can become legally and emotionally complex, parents often benefit from understanding their rights and responsibilities before conflicts escalate.

Do Student Loans Affect Divorce Agreements?

Student loans and rising college costs have become increasingly important issues in family law cases.

As tuition prices continue increasing nationwide, many divorced parents face difficult questions regarding:

borrowing for education
allocating loan responsibilities
financial aid eligibility
long-term repayment concerns

Changes in the financial aid landscape and federal student loan policies may also affect how families plan for educational expenses after divorce.

For this reason, many parents now address college funding issues earlier during divorce negotiations instead of waiting until children are preparing for college applications.

Careful planning may help families avoid future disputes and financial uncertainty. College expense disputes can create significant stress for divorced parents and families.

If you are dealing with divorce, parenting agreements, or college expense disputes in Illinois, the family law team at Weiss Ortiz Attorneys & Mediators can help you understand your legal options.

Illinois SB3524 Could Change Child Support Calculations in Shared Parenting Case

Wed, 10 Jun 2026 02:48:24 GMT

A proposed Illinois law could change how child support is calculated in shared parenting cases. Learn how SB3524 may affect parenting time and support obligations.

Parenting schedules can play a major role in child support cases in Illinois. For many families, the number of overnight visits each parent has with a child may directly affect how support is calculated.

Now, a proposed Illinois bill known as SB3524 could significantly change the way child support works in shared parenting situations.

Currently, many parents and family law attorneys closely monitor whether a parent reaches a specific threshold of overnight parenting time. Under the proposed legislation, support calculations could begin adjusting earlier and more gradually than they do under current law.

For parents navigating divorce, custody disputes, or parenting agreements, understanding these possible changes may become increasingly important.

What Is the 146 Overnight Rule in Illinois?

Many parents refer to the current system as the “146 overnight rule.”

Under existing Illinois child support guidelines, a shared parenting formula may apply when each parent has the child for at least 146 overnights per year. This threshold is important because it can substantially change how child support is calculated.

In many cases, parents who fall just below the 146-night mark may see very different financial outcomes compared to parents who exceed it, even if the actual parenting schedule is relatively similar.

Because of this, overnight counts often become a major issue during:

custody negotiations
parenting time disputes
divorce settlements
child support modification cases

Courts may examine parenting schedules carefully when determining whether shared parenting calculations apply.

What Would SB3524 Change?

SB3524 proposes a more gradual approach to calculating child support in shared parenting cases.

Instead of relying heavily on a single threshold at 146 overnights, the proposed law would introduce adjustments beginning at approximately 110 overnights per year.

The bill would also create gradual percentage adjustments between 110 and 145 overnights rather than triggering one major calculation change at a single point.

In practical terms, this could reduce the sharp financial difference that currently exists between:

parents with slightly different parenting schedules
shared parenting arrangements near the current threshold
cases involving flexible custody schedules

The proposal may also include the use of overnight equivalents in certain situations, which could affect how parenting time is evaluated for support purposes.

Supporters of the bill argue that the current system can create unnecessary conflict over overnight counts, while the proposed structure may better reflect modern co-parenting arrangements.

Why This Matters for Parents

If SB3524 becomes law, it could affect many areas of family law cases in Illinois.

For example, parents negotiating custody agreements may need to consider how parenting schedules could influence child support obligations under the updated formula. The proposed changes could also impact:

shared parenting negotiations
financial planning after divorce
parenting time agreements
child support modification requests
co-parenting disputes

In some situations, parents may place significant focus on overnight schedules because even small changes in parenting time may affect support calculations.

For families already navigating emotionally difficult custody matters, these financial considerations may add another layer of complexity.

Speaking with a child support attorney in Illinois may help parents better understand how proposed legal changes could apply to their situation.

Could Parenting Time Affect Child Support?

Yes. Parenting time can significantly affect child support calculations in Illinois.

Courts often examine the number of overnights each parent has with the child, along with the overall parenting arrangement, when determining support obligations. However, every case is different. Factors such as:

each parent’s income
the parenting schedule
childcare costs
healthcare expenses
educational expenses
may also influence the final calculation.

Because child support laws can be complex and subject to legislative updates, parents should avoid assuming that one formula automatically applies to every case.

Is SB3524 Already Law?

At this time, SB3524 has passed both houses of the Illinois legislature, but families should continue monitoring updates before assuming the changes are final.

Legislation can still move through additional procedural steps before becoming fully effective law.

Parents involved in ongoing divorce, custody, or child support matters may benefit from staying informed about potential legal developments and how they could affect future support calculations.

Child support and parenting time issues can become complicated, especially when laws and calculation methods continue evolving.

If you have questions about child support, custody agreements, or shared parenting arrangements in Illinois, the family law team at Weiss Ortiz Attorneys & Mediators can help you better understand your legal options.

Thinking About Divorce in Illinois? 3 Key Facts You Need to Know

Tue, 11 Nov 2025 22:37:37 GMT

Are you considering a divorce in Illinois? Before you take action, it’s crucial to understand the state’s legal requirements

Knowing the residency requirements, the no-fault system, and how custody and property are handled can help you make informed decisions and protect your future.

Residency Requirement for Divorce in Illinois

To file for divorce in Illinois, at least one spouse must have lived in the state for a minimum of 90 days before filing the petition or before the court enters judgment.

This rule ensures that Illinois courts have jurisdiction to g rant the divorce. If the residency requirement is not met, your case could be delayed or dismissed.
Before filing, make sure you or your spouse meet this basic eligibility condition.

Tip from an Illinois divorce lawyer: Con firming residency early can prevent unnecessary complications later in your case.

Illinois Is a No-Fault Divorce State

Illinois follows a no-fault divorce system, meaning you don’t have to prove that your spouse did something wrong—like adultery or cruelty—to obtain a divorce.

The only legal ground required is irreconcilable differences. If both spouses have lived separately for at least six months, the court presumes that irreconcilable differences exist.

This approach simplifies the process. Instead of focusing on assigning blame, couples can concentrate on reaching fair agreements about parenting, financial support, and division of assets.

In short: Divorce in Illinois isn’t about proving fault—it’s about resolving key life issues with clarity and fairness.

Parenting, Custody, and Property Division

When filing for divorce in Illinois, two major components typically come into play: parenting (if there are children) and the division of marital assets and debt.

Parenting and Child Custody

The court must approve or decide arrangements for parental responsibilities, parenting time, and child support.
Illinois courts always prioritize the best interests of the child when making these determinations, aiming for stability and continued involvement of both parents whenever possible.

Property and Debt Division

I llinois applies the “equitable distribution” principle. This means that all marital property—anything acquired during the marriage—is divided fairly, though not always equally.
Non-marital property, such as gifts, inheritances, or assets owned before marriage, remains with the original owner.

Courts consider several factors, such as each spouse’s contributions, economic circumstances, and the length of the marriage, to ensure a just outcome.

Why These Facts Matter

Understanding these key elements gives you a strategic advantage as you begin the process:

You ensure your case meets all residency and jurisdictional requirements.
You adopt a realistic mindset—divorce in Illinois is about resolution, not blame.
You can focus on outcomes that protect your children, finances, and peace of mind.

Being informed also allows you to communicate more effectively with your Illinois family law attorney, helping them build a case strategy that supports your goals.

Why Work with a Trusted Illinois Divorce Lawyer

A divorce affects every aspect of your future—your children, finances, property, and emotional well-being. At Weiss Ortiz, our Illinois family law attorneys have decades of experience helping clients through every stage of the divorce process. We provide clear legal guidance and compassionate support so you can move forward confidently.

We help you:

Understand your legal options from day one.
Meet all court requirements, including the 90-day residency rule.
Develop a personalized strategy—whether through amicable negotiation or courtroom representation.
Protect what matters most: your family, your assets, and your peace of mind.

Ready to Take the Next Step?

If you’re thinking about divorce in Illinois, don’t navigate it alone.
Contact Weiss Ortiz today to schedule a consultation with an experienced Illinois divorce lawyer and start protecting your future.

Child Custody in Illinois: What Parents Need to Know

Wed, 29 Oct 2025 01:57:08 GMT

What Parents Need to Know

Navigating child custody matters can be a highly emotional and legally complex process. For parents in Illinois, understanding how custody — now legally defined as allocation of parental responsibilities and parenting time — is determined under current law is essential.

This 2025 guide explains key statutes, best practices, and important considerations for parents involved in the process, as well as how Weiss Ortiz supports families every step of the way.

Legal Framework for Child Custody in Illinois

Illinois law no longer uses the terms “custody” and “visitation.” Instead, the relevant statutes refer to allocation of parental responsibilities (which covers decision-making authority) and parenting time (formerly “visitation”).

This terminology emphasizes a child-centered approach, with the court evaluating the child’s best interests when allocating responsibilities and time.

Statute 750 ILCS 5/602.7 provides that the court shall allocate parenting time in accordance with the child’s best interests and outlines factors such as each parent’s caretaking functions, the child’s adjustment to home, school, and community, and the mental and physical health of all persons involved.

Under 750 ILCS 5/602.10 , all parents — within 120 days after filing a petition for allocation of parental responsibilities — must submit a proposed parenting plan .
If the parents cannot agree on such a plan, the court may order mediation and proceed with an evidentiary hearing.

Because of these deadlines and procedural requirements, timely legal support is critical to avoid delays and ensure the plan is developed in the child’s best interest.

What the Court Considers

When making decisions regarding allocation of parental responsibilities or parenting time, Illinois courts evaluate multiple factors under §602.7. These include:

The wishes of each parent and the child (if mature enough).
The amount of time each parent spent performing caretaking functions in the 24 months preceding the petition.
The child’s adjustment to home, school, and community.
The distance between parents’ residences and the ease of transportation.
Whether placing restrictions on a parent’s time is necessary due to endangerment to the child’s physical, mental, moral, or emotional health.

Additionally, parental conduct that does not affect the parent-child relationship should not be used as grounds to restrict parenting time.

Why Legal Representation Matters

Because the law requires precise documentation, filing deadlines, and well-drafted parenting plans, having experienced counsel can make a significant difference.

At Weiss Ortiz , we help parents:

Understand how the statutes apply to their unique circumstances.
Develop a comprehensive parenting plan that addresses decision-making, parenting time, and dispute resolution.
Navigate interstate issues or relocation requests.
Respond to modifications when significant changes in circumstances occur.

Our goal is to protect your rights and support your child’s best interests throughout the process.

Additional Support for Clients

We understand that certain families may face additional challenges in accessing legal services.

For our Latino clients who may feel unsafe leaving their homes due to immigration enforcement concerns, we provide telephone, video, and in-home consultations to ensure you receive legal support in a safe environment.

DISCRIMINATION—NATIONAL ORIGIN—N.D. Ill.: Discharge of white coworker, after employee complained of being ‘singled out,’ could support discrimination finding, (Feb 3, 2022)

Thu, 14 Apr 2022 21:33:19 GMT

Law Firms Mentioned: Seyfarth Shaw | Weiss Ortiz

Organizations Mentioned: North Shore University Health System

By Brandi O. Brown, J.D.

According to the plaintiff, the other worker was only fired for the same offense after the plaintiff had pointed out that others had violated the same policy.

A patient support associate for a healthcare delivery system advanced claims of national origin and color discrimination against her former employer after a federal district court in Illinois denied the employer’s motion for summary judgment. The employee contended she was singled out for termination, without warning, for a timecard offense after suffering years of harassment, including offensive comments, based on the fact that she is of Mexican descent. She contended that it was only after she pointed out that she was being singled out that another employee was fired for committing the same offense. She also alleged that she was given a heavier workload and told “if she was Mexican, she could work a little harder when she needed things done quickly” ( Morales v. Northshore University Healthsystem , February 2, 2022, Kennelly, M.).

Comments and comparisons. For four years the employee worked as a patient support associate for Northshore, for two years in one location and for two years in another. At both, she alleges, she experienced consistent harassment and bullying based on her Mexican heritage. She alleged that she was called “negra” and the department slave. She was compared to cleaning and kitchen staff and told she was “probably treated better in the kitchen than she was in the department.”

The employee also contended that her coworkers joked that she had driven her father’s pickup truck to work because she was there to pick up scrap metal. She alleged she was identified as the “Mexican who worked probably like a drug lord, who probably had a tunnel in the basement” and that she was compared to the drug lord El Chapo. She alleged that one surgical scheduler repeatedly harassed her to hurry up her work and “told [her] that if she was Mexican, she could work a little harder when she needed things done quickly.” In fact, she contended, she was given a workload that was heavier than that of white and non-Mexican patient support associates.

Fraud accusation and termination. In March 2018, the employee learned that she had been accused of timecard fraud for repeatedly parking her car in front of the building to swipe in to work before returning to park it in the parking lot. She was suspended. She told the employer that she was being unfairly “singled out” and that other employees had violated the same policy. In April she was fired. On the same day the employer fired one of her coworkers, also for timecard falsification. Prior to her termination, the employee filed a charge of discrimination with the Illinois Department of Human Rights. She later filed suit and both parties moved for summary judgment.

Discriminatory termination. After briefly considering and rejecting the arguments made by the employer regarding timeliness and failure to exhaust, the court considered whether the evidence would support a conclusion that the employee was subjected to national origin and color discrimination. It concluded that it would. While the employer argued that the employee failed to meet its legitimate expectations because she violated timekeeping policies, the employee maintained that the act of badging in to work before parking her car, which she admitted to doing, was not a violation of its legitimate expectations. Instead, she argued, that the employer selectively enforced its policies in a discriminatory manner, and she contended that other employees violated similar policies and were not fired. She also argued that the employer’s investigation into her supposed violations was deficient.

Similarly situated or treated better? A genuine dispute of fact exists, precluding summary judgment, on this point, the court concluded. The employee presented evidence that the employer did not fire other employee for similar policy violations—instead, there was evidence that other workers were given warnings and allowed to continue working. The employee, however, was fired without warning. Although the employer pointed to a white, European employee fired on the same day for the same violation, the employee disputes that the other worker was treated the same. She alleges that the other worker was fired only after the employee notified the employer that other workers had violated the same policy and claimed that she was being singled out. That fact, the court concluded, could persuade a reasonable jury that the employer treated similarly situated workers outside of the employee’s protected class better than her.

Moreover, there was evidence that several employees who committed similar violations were only given warnings and a genuine factual dispute existed on that point. There were several similarities between the employee and the other workers she referenced—they had the same job, the same supervisor, and violated similar policies, such as improper badging in, spending working hours on the internet, and parking in patient parking lots.

Hostile work environment. As for the employee’s hostile environment claims, the employer argued that the employee alleged only “off-color comments, isolated incidents, teasing, and other unpleasantries that are, unfortunately, not uncommon in the workplace.” However, the court concluded there were genuine disputes regarding whether the alleged harassment was sufficiently severe or pervasive and a reasonable jury could conclude it went “far beyond ‘unpleasantries’ that are ‘common in the workplace.’” It noted that she had described almost 60 instances of harassment over a four-year period, including multiple months in which there were more than four instances of harassment.

A reasonable jury could find this conduct would be offensive to a reasonable person in a way that altered employment conditions. Many of the incidents the employee described happened in front of others and reasonably would have caused considerable embarrassment. The employee contended that, while she was able to continue performing her job satisfactorily, she experienced depression, anxiety, and severe stress that led to two miscarriages.

Did she report it? The employer also argued that there was no basis for holding it liable for the conduct of the employee’s coworkers, contending that the employee never reported the alleged harassment. On this issue, the court noted, the parties presented competing evidence—the employee said she reported it, the employer said she did not and presented testimony of her former supervisors. Deciding between these competing accounts, the court explained, involves a credibility determination.

Finally, the question of whether the employee reported the harassment also created to a genuine dispute on her retaliation claim. She testified that she reported the harassment and discrimination in February 2018, only one month before she was suspended. The employer argued there was no causal link. The court explained that there was a genuine dispute regarding pretext. Moreover, the court rejected the employee’s motion for partial summary judgment regarding the employer’s alleged negligence in failing to prevent or correct this discrimination, harassment, and retaliation, also because of the genuine dispute about whether she reported the harassment.

The case is No. 20 C 2175 .

Attorneys: Adeena Joele Weiss (Weiss Ortiz) for Rosy Morales. Marc R. Jacobs (Seyfarth Shaw) for North Shore University Health System.

Companies: North Shore University Health System

Cases: NationalOrigin RaceDiscrimination Discrimination Retaliation Discharge IllinoisNews GCNNews

Source: vitallaw.com, “ DISCRIMINATION—NATIONAL ORIGIN—N.D. Ill.: Discharge of white coworker, after employee complained of being ‘singled out,’ could support discrimination findin g ” Brandi O. Brown, J.D., Feb 3, 2022

Illinois bike lane ban questioned after cyclist’s death

Tue, 11 Jun 2013 13:57:00 GMT

A Chicago proposal to add bicycle lanes to Clybourn Avenue in Old Town was thwarted by state transportation officials. The Illinois Department of Transportation oversees a section of the neighborhood street where a bicyclist died after being struck by a car.

IDOT ordered a stop to bike lane construction on roads the agency manages until next year, the anticipated end of a long-term safety study. Observers wonder whether holding up Chicago’s plans cost a 26-year-old bike rider his life.

The cycle was the second vehicle a Mercedes hit after colliding with another car. A volunteer rescuer said the Mercedes’ three occupants appeared to be unhurt. The cyclist lay about 40 feet from the car wreck. The victim’s leg was severed.

An investigation of the fatal crash is incomplete. Police have not filed charges against the unidentified 28-year-old man whose car struck the bike rider.

Reports did not include a cause for the head-on collision. Isolating the car accident from the auto-bicycle crash will help police understand whether the cyclist’s death was due to a criminal act.

Criminal wrongdoing may influence the outcome of a civil trial. A civil claim gains strength with evidence of a crime, although negligence includes behaviors that may not break a prosecutable law.

The primary defendant in a wrongful death action likely would be the driver of the Mercedes. Secondary blame could be placed on government officials for neglecting to protect the public from known danger.

An attorney would probe the reasons Chicago officials wanted a bike lane on Clybourn Avenue. Did lawmakers notice a history of injury accidents or fatalities involving cyclists in the neighborhood? Was Chicago unable to safeguard its residents because of the state mandate?

The state transportation department’s action forced inaction in Chicago. Defendants who knew or should have foreseen unsafe conditions may be held liable in victims and families’ claims for injuries or wrongful deaths.

Source: chi.streetsblog.org, “ Driver Kills Cyclist on Clybourn, Where IDOT Is Blocking Protected Bike Lanes ” Steven Vance, May. 30, 2013

The post Illinois bike lane ban questioned after cyclist’s death appeared first on Weiss Ortiz P.C. .

The State of Civil Unions in Illinois

Tue, 11 Jun 2013 13:57:00 GMT

While some Illinois lawmakers are vowing to raise the issue again later this year, same-sex and opposite-sex couples can still gain legal rights by entering into Illinois civil unions.

Same Sex Civil Unions Since 2011

Illinois has legally joined same-sex couples in civil unions since the summer of 2011, with Cook County making up more than half of the early same-sex civil unions in the state.

The Civil Union Act granted same-sex couples the same state benefits conferred upon opposite-sex married couples .

The Act also provided that same-sex couples legally married in other states would automatically be considered as having a civil union under Illinois law.

Still No Federal Benefits

State law provides state benefits for same-sex couples in Illinois. But while DOMA is still in effect, federal benefits for married couples will not be provided for Illinois civil unions .

This means that federal employees in Chicago who are in a legal civil union may not be able to share their employee health insurance with their partner .

The U.S. Supreme Court may provide an answer about the constitutionality of DOMA and denying same-sex couples federal benefits this summer.

Increasing Support for Equality

Although same-sex equality has its detractors in Illinois , a notable proponent since the 2011 civil unions is President Obama, who now supports marriage equality in his home state.

Many opposite-sex couples have also made vows of solidarity to either refuse to marry until it is legal for same sex couples or to choose the egalitarian civil union option instead .

Related Resources:

See original article:
The State of Civil Unions in Illinois

Choosing A Designated Driver

Tue, 11 Jun 2013 13:50:00 GMT

The National Highway Traffic Safety Administration reports that 90 percent of Americans who go to social events where drinking occurs believe that a designated driver should be used. When done correctly, designated driver programs can help communities greatly reduce the number of drunk driving accidents and fatalities they experience. The programs also send an important message about planning ahead and ensuring that everyone gets home safe after drinking alcohol. Unfortunately, a recent study indicates that the programs may not be operating as they should.

University of Florida researchers asked people leaving area bars if they had chosen a designated driver. If they had, the team asked if the driver would submit to a breathalyzer test. The group found 165 people who labeled themselves as designated drivers. Of those, 35 percent had consumed alcohol at the bar in question.

The NHTSA identifies designated drivers as people who either refrain from drinking alcohol or who arrange for safe rides home for the members of a group. It specifically states that designated drivers are “not the person who’s the most sober.” This message of abstaining from drinking in order to make sure everyone gets home safe may have been lost since the programs first became popular in the early 1990s.

The Florida study indicated that social pressure to drink and the current blood alcohol limit of .08 are the most likely culprits for why designated drivers are drinking. When choosing a designated driver, it should be clear to you and to the person who is chosen that being a designated driver means abstaining from any alcohol consumption.

Source: Fox News, “ Nearly 40 percent of designated drivers drink before driving, study suggests ,” 10 June 2013

The post Choosing A Designated Driver appeared first on Weiss Ortiz P.C. .

Minorities Pay More for Housing than Non-minorities

Fri, 07 Jun 2013 19:12:00 GMT

/* Style Definitions */ table.MsoNormalTable {mso-style-name:”Table Normal”; mso-tstyle-rowband-size:0; mso-tstyle-colband-size:0; mso-style-noshow:yes; mso-style-priority:99; mso-style-parent:””; mso-padding-alt:0in 5.4pt 0in 5.4pt; mso-para-margin:0in; mso-para-margin-bottom:.0001pt; mso-pagination:widow-orphan; font-size:12.0pt; font-family:Cambria; mso-ascii-font-family:Cambria; mso-ascii-theme-font:minor-latin; mso-hansi-font-family:Cambria; mso-hansi-theme-font:minor-latin;}

pay more

Over the past 18 years

substantial amount

Bayer

The post Minorities Pay More for Housing than Non-minorities appeared first on Weiss Ortiz P.C. .

Litigation Skills Training Program

Fri, 07 Jun 2013 16:43:00 GMT

The John Marshall Law School Fair Housing Legal Support Center will conduct the 21st annual training on Effective Advocacy under the Fair Housing Laws, a skills training program for attorneys who litigate fair housing cases, from January 24–26, 2013.

The program focuses on the practical skills an attorney needs to proceed in a contested hearing or trial in a fair housing case. Particularemphasis is placed on trial advocacy techniques used in the direct and cross examination of witnesses, opening statements, and closing arguments.

The program is open on a first-come, first-serve basis to 36 attorneys who want to learn more about how to litigate a fair housing case. All potential participants must register by Monday, December 17, 2012, either by fax to 312.427.9438 or by mail. If you have any questions regarding this program, please contact the Fair Housing Legal Support Center at 312.987.2397.

The post Litigation Skills Training Program appeared first on Weiss Ortiz P.C. .

Section 8 Is Now Protected In Cook County, Illinois

Tue, 21 May 2013 06:02:00 GMT

Commissioner Garcia

The post Section 8 Is Now Protected In Cook County, Illinois appeared first on Weiss Ortiz P.C. .

Sex Discrimination Alive and Well in Mortgage Lending

Thu, 16 May 2013 17:30:00 GMT

v\:* {behavior:url(#default#VML);} o\:* {behavior:url(#default#VML);} w\:* {behavior:url(#default#VML);} .shape {behavior:url(#default#VML);}
/* Style Definitions */ table.MsoNormalTable {mso-style-name:”Table Normal”; mso-tstyle-rowband-size:0; mso-tstyle-colband-size:0; mso-style-noshow:yes; mso-style-priority:99; mso-style-parent:””; mso-padding-alt:0in 5.4pt 0in 5.4pt; mso-para-margin:0in; mso-para-margin-bottom:.0001pt; mso-pagination:widow-orphan; font-size:12.0pt; font-family:Cambria; mso-ascii-font-family:Cambria; mso-ascii-theme-font:minor-latin; mso-hansi-font-family:Cambria; mso-hansi-theme-font:minor-latin;}

The post Sex Discrimination Alive and Well in Mortgage Lending appeared first on Weiss Ortiz P.C. .

HUD is Mandating Westchester County to Meet the Settlement Requirements

Mon, 06 May 2013 11:10:00 GMT

The post HUD is Mandating Westchester County to Meet the Settlement Requirements appeared first on Weiss Ortiz P.C. .

Oxford House continues to fight for the right to have group homes:

Thu, 11 Apr 2013 01:26:00 GMT

The post Oxford House continues to fight for the right to have group homes: appeared first on Weiss Ortiz P.C. .

What is meant by “Affirmatively Furthering Fair Housing”?

Fri, 29 Mar 2013 07:02:00 GMT

The 1968 Fair Housing Act directed governments and their agencies to “affirmatively further” fair housing. The Act outlawed discrimination in the sale and rental of housing.Yet after more than four decades, residential segregation and racial discrimination in housing remains virtually unchanged in many of our cities. Minorities, mainly African-Americans and Hispanics continue to experience discrimination in housing partly because of the lack of local and federal agencies not willing to enforce the mandate of “affirmatively furthering” fair housing. As a result discrimination continues.

ProPublica’s story on the Rembis family is an all too familiar example of housing discrimination. Claire Rembis and her husband came across a four-bedroom house advertised on Craigslist. It sounded like just what they had been looking for. It provided ample room for their children to run and play and the monthly rent was much cheaper than that of other homes they had looked at. They had a look at the house and loved it.

Three days later, Claire Rembis got a call from the landlord saying she was dropping by to see how the family lived. During the landlord’s visit, she asked Claire who is biracial, whether she was concerned about living in the area (which is predominantly white). A few days later Claire received an email saying the family could not rent the house because there were issues with their credit and they had too many small children.

By then, Claire had already contacted a non- profit Fair Housing Center. The center arranged for black and white testers to ask to rent the house. The black family and the white family had the same income, the same credit history, and the black family had the least number of kids. The black family was not even allowed to see the house and their calls were not returned. The white tester was shown the property, was immediately called back and invited to see the house.

The Rembis family case is not an isolated one. HUD studies have found that African Americans and Hispanics are discriminated against in one of every five home-buying encounters and one in every four attempts to rent an apartment. Only a scant few of these incidents ever come to the attention of authorities. The negligible number of housing discrimination cases arises largely from choices by federal agencies. Instead of actively searching for landlords and agents who discriminate, federal officials open investigations only after complaints are filed. But most victims have no idea they’ve been discriminated against, which means they never demand an inquiry. Experts say undercover testing is the most effective way to catch landlords and real estate agents, who conceal their intentions behind smiling faces and seemingly open, friendly attitudes.

>However, the federal government almost never uses this technique. HUD, the chief enforcement agency of the FHA, runs no testing program of its own. Instead, it outsources the work to a host of poorly funded private housing groups. In support of this practice, a HUD spokesman released a statement saying the agency avoids conducting its own tests for racial bias so it can remain “neutral” when it receives complaints.

Congressman Al Green , has introduced a bill for the fourth time, to fund a national program to test for housing discrimination in a bid to affirmatively further housing. The Veterans, Women, Families with Children, Race, and Persons with Disabilities Housing Fairness Act of 2013 is also known as the Housing Fairness Act of 2013. It authorizes$15 million annually over five years for HUD to administer the nationwide testing program to measure patterns of adverse treatment in the housing market. Green’s previous bills on the issue have all died at the committee stage, without reaching a full vote in the House. This is a testament to a lack of priority in fighting housing discrimination. “I don’t believe this is something we can ignore. I plan to keep introducing the bill as long as I am in Congress until we pass it,” Green said.

Thus, four decades after the passage of the Fair Housing Act, it is clear that the federal government’s approach to tackling housing discrimination is ineffective. HUD’s option to fund non-profit groups around the country to perform tests helps bring the majority of lawsuits involving housing discrimination. However, large parts of the country are not subject to any discrimination testing.

It is clear that a national fair housing testing program would be the most effective and efficient way to bring about change and end behavior that perpetuates segregation and has the capability to reach the kinds of discrimination that are not identified by victims, or where the victims may be unaware of their rights or reluctant to file complaints. Instituting a national testing program will definitely be a way to “affirmatively further” fair housing.

The post What is meant by “Affirmatively Furthering Fair Housing”? appeared first on Weiss Ortiz P.C. .

HUD Finally Issues Rule Formalizing Standard On Discriminatory Effect In Housing

Wed, 06 Mar 2013 20:45:00 GMT

On February 8, 2013, the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (“HUD”) issued a final rule, “Implementation of the Fair Housing Act’s Discriminatory Effects Standard. The rule formalizes a national standard for determining whether a housing practice violates the Fair Housing Act as the result of a discriminatory effect. The rule goes into effect on March 18, 2013.

HUD takes the position that the Rule reaffirms, formalizes, and provides a consistent interpretation of, its longstanding position that liability may arise under the FHA from a racially neutral practice that has a discriminatory effect, even if there is no evidence that the practice was motivated by discriminatory intent. HUD Secretary Shaun Donovan said “the Department, which has the responsibility and authority to interpret and enforce the Fair Housing Act, has long interpreted the Act to prohibit housing practices with an unjustified discriminatory effect, if those acts actually or predictably result in a disparate impact on a group of persons, or create, increase, reinforce or perpetuate segregated housing patterns. Indeed, this well-established legal precedent has been critically important in helping HUD remedy discriminatory practices in home rentals, sales, and financing nationwide. The rule formalizes the existing legal framework of the Fair Housing Act.”

The regulation is intended to establish uniform standards for determining when a housing practice with a discriminatory effect violates the Fair Housing Act. Eleven circuits court of appeals have agreed. However, there have been minor variations in how courts and HUD have applied the discriminatory effects theory.

The rule establishes a three-part test for proving liability for an unlawful discriminatory effect on housing-related activities, including the rental and financing of homes, on the basis of race, color, religion, sex, disability, familial status or national origin. The test does not take into consideration whether there has been any intention to discriminate, but focuses instead on whether a particular housing practice results in a discriminatory effect. A Plaintiff must prove that a challenged practice caused or predictably will cause a discriminatory effect. Once the plaintiff meets this burden of proof, the burden shifts to the defendant to prove that the challenged practice is necessary to achieve one or more substantial, legitimate, nondiscriminatory interests. If the defendant satisfies that burden, the plaintiff may still prevail by proving that the substantial, legitimate, nondiscriminatory interests supporting the challenged practice could be served by another practice that has a less discriminatory effect.

The rule provides clarity and consistency for individuals, businesses, and government entities subject to the Fair Housing Act. HUD anticipates that the rule will make it easier for individuals and organizations covered by the law to understand their responsibilities and comply with the law. Lending institutions and other housing providers expressed concern about formalizing the discriminatory effects liability standard as a regulation. HUD considered their comments but ultimately determined that the rule will not have a chilling effect on lending in lower-income communities, on development of affordable housing, on the use of credit scores, other evaluative tools or on other matters.

Fair housing advocates on the other hand, welcomed the news that the long-awaited rule would finally be published. In a press statement, Wade Henderson, president and CEO of The Leadership Conference on Civil and Human Rights, said, “by releasing these regulations on disparate impact today, HUD is empowering municipalities across the country to enforce housing codes equally for all Americans and bolstering protections for those who face housing discrimination.” Let’s just hope that the rule will be affirmed by the highest court of the land.

The post HUD Finally Issues Rule Formalizing Standard On Discriminatory Effect In Housing appeared first on Weiss Ortiz P.C. .

Illinois Senate Passes Historic Marriage Bill On Valentine’s Day

Sat, 16 Feb 2013 00:35:00 GMT

The post Illinois Senate Passes Historic Marriage Bill On Valentine’s Day appeared first on Weiss Ortiz P.C. .

Road to extending Section 8 protection in Cook County Illinois

Sat, 09 Feb 2013 23:25:00 GMT

WBEZ

The post Road to extending Section 8 protection in Cook County Illinois appeared first on Weiss Ortiz P.C. .

Discrimination because of Aids continues…

Mon, 14 Jan 2013 05:55:00 GMT

The post Discrimination because of Aids continues… appeared first on Weiss Ortiz P.C. .

HUD Kicks Off Fair Housing Month Declaring 2010 a “Time to Act”

Fri, 07 Dec 2012 17:27:00 GMT

In an April 1st press release, HUD highlighted its achievements from last year and proclaimed its continuing commitment to ensure Fair Housing for all in the year to come.

Full Press Release Here

Massachusetts AG Obtains Consent Judgment on Craigslist Advertisements
The judgment resolves allegations that a landlord made discriminatory statements in rental advertisements posted on Craigslist for including the phrase “no section 8.” Such language violates the “source of income” provision in Massachusetts Fair Housing Statute, a provision notably absent from the Federal Fair Housing Act.

The case is “the result of a continuing statewide investigation by the Attorney General’s Office into reports of widespread discriminatory housing advertisements on the Internet.” On October 28, 2009, the Attorney General’s Office reached 20 settlements and filed six complaints against landlords and real estate agents across the Commonwealth accused of violating state anti-discrimination laws on Craigslist.

“As more families face tough financial times and have no choice but to rent, landlords and real estate professionals must recognize that the rental market is a regulated industry and compliance with our anti-discrimination laws is an important obligation,” said Attorney General Coakley. “While we hope that this enforcement initiative will have a deterrent effect, our office will continue to monitor Craigslist and take action against persons and entities that violate the law.” ( Full Press Release Here )

Are Emotional Support Dogs Protected by the FHA?
As is clear from the HUD press release, service dogs assisting persons with disabilities are usually covered by the FHA under the reasonable accommodation provision. Less clear however, is whether the FHA will protect residents from being forced to give up “emotional support” animals when private housing rules place limitations on pet ownership.

In Harford County Maryland, a father and daughter are fighting a condo association’s determination that they must find another home for their dog because it exceeds the one dog only policy. The second dog, Jack, came into the family to assist the mother during her last few months to live while suffering from stage 4 colon cancer.

While such a case might seem to elicit sympathy, whether such circumstances demand the force of law seems unlikely. ( Full Article Here )

JMLS to Host Fair Housing Law Program on April 16 and 17
The John Marshall Law School Fair Housing Legal Support Center is presenting the program “Fair Housing Law and Enforcement: A Basic Survey of the Law and Practice.”

The cost is $300 and Attorneys can receive 10 CLE credits. To register contact Maria Chavez at (312) 427-9438 or mchavez@jmls.edu. ( Full News-brief Here )

The post HUD Kicks Off Fair Housing Month Declaring 2010 a “Time to Act” appeared first on Weiss Ortiz P.C. .

ACLU suit accuses Morgan Stanley of fair housing discrimination

Wed, 17 Oct 2012 19:34:00 GMT

The Wall Street Journal reports that American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) filed suit on behalf of Michigan Legal Services, a non-profit community advocacy group, and five individual Detroit residents against Morgan Stanley. The ACLU alleges that Morgan Stanley provided critical funding to New Century Financial Corp., a now-defunct subprime lender, and encouraged lending tactics that raised the risks associated with the loans. New Century was the second biggest U.S. subprime mortgage lender until its collapse in April 2007. The ACLU accuses Morgan Stanley of discriminating against black homeowners and violating federal civil rights laws by providing incentives to subprime mortgage lenders to originate mortgages that were destined for foreclosure. The ACLU is calling it the first case to connect racial discrimination to mortgage securitization, in which loans are bundled and sold to institutional investors. It is also the first case where homeowners are suing an investment bank directly rather than the subprime lender whose loans the bank bought, the ACLU said.

The post ACLU suit accuses Morgan Stanley of fair housing discrimination appeared first on Weiss Ortiz P.C. .

Round and Round the “Steering” Wheel Goes for Allentown, Pennsylvania

Mon, 09 Jul 2012 16:10:00 GMT

As we have reported previously, discrimination is alive and well in our communities, as the community of Allentown, Pennsylvania, discovered. The Morning Call, a local newspaper, reports that a housing “sting” operation revealed that real estate agents treated white and minority home buyers differently in 73 percent of cases, steering white buyers to the suburbs and minorities to the city, even when they each had the same job history and income.

These actions, known as “steering”, are illegal under the federal fair housing act. County officials state that this practice could have damaged Allentown’s economic development for decades, draining income and diversity from city neighborhoods.

The Community Action Committee of the Lehigh Valley, with Allentown’s help, organized the fair housing test after years of hearing anecdotes of housing discrimination, said Alan Jennings, executive director of the CACLV. “Next time, we’re not going to hold a press conference,” Mayor Ed Pawlowski said. “…[W]e’re going to file federal charges.”

The Fair Housing Council of Suburban Philadelphia set up 33 tests between March 2011 and December 2011 — 22 by phone and 11 in person — that had one white buyer and one minority buyer asking to look at homes in Allentown.

Other than race or ethnicity, each buyer was identical on paper, with the same income level, employment history and number of household residents.

But the Fair Housing Council said in nearly three-fourths of cases — 24 tests — treatment varied by race. Only in one test were home buyers treated similarly. Eight cases were inconclusive.

“We’re standing here over a century later and we’re still talking about fighting unfair practices — practices we thought had gone by the wayside because of laws that exist,” said Dan Boskett, president of the local chapter of the NAACP.

Meanwhile, Ryan Conrad, the CEO of the Lehigh Valley Association of Realtors, stood alongside Jennings and the mayor, promising the association would work to educate the nearly 2,000 licensed agents in the Lehigh Valley.

Conrad said there is a “zero tolerance to noncompliance” and that the association is taking these findings “very seriously.”

He said the association will ask members to sign and display a pledge vowing compliance with federal fair housing laws. The association will also host a fair housing forum, launch a publication for consumers informing them of their rights and establish a minority task force.

A slap on the wrist seems like light punishment, but the threat of a suit in federal court should change the direction in which the housing market in Allentown is headed.

The post Round and Round the “Steering” Wheel Goes for Allentown, Pennsylvania appeared first on Weiss Ortiz P.C. .

SunTrust $21Million Settlement with DOJ

Fri, 08 Jun 2012 21:06:00 GMT

This past Thursday, Businessweek covered a massive settlement in a federal lawsuit alleging racial discrimination in SunTrust’s lending practices. The suit, filed by the US DOJ, was filed in the U.S. District Court in Richmond, VA, alleging more than 20,000 African-American and Hispanic borrowers were charged more than similarly-situated and qualified non-Hispanic white borrowers, between 2005 and 2009.

The suit alleged that minority borrowers in 75 geographic markets from Virginia Beach, VA to San Francisco, CA, paid more in loan fees, or were charged higher interest rates based solely on race or national origin.

A consent order filed with the complaint says SunTrust denies any wrongdoing, but agreed to the settlement. “SunTrust strongly believes in the principles of fair lending,” company spokesman Mike McCoy in Atlanta said. “We are pleased to have reached a settlement and put this matter behind us.”

Settlements like this come as a surprise, considering the massive $335 million fair-lending settlement with the “Big 5” banks. “At the core of the complaint is a simple story: If you were African-American or Latino, you likely paid more for a SunTrust loan than a similarly qualified white borrower simply because of your skin color … You paid what amounted to a racial surtax that ranged from hundreds to thousands of dollars,” said Thomas E. Perez, assistant attorney general for the Civil Rights Division.

The suit sprang forth from a referral from the Federal Reserve, which reviewed the Richmond-based mortgage company’s compliance with the Fair Housing Act and the Equal Credit Opportunity Act. The DOJ said it reviewed more than 850,000 residential mortgage loans originated by SunTrust between 2005 and 2009.

According to the data, SunTrust set prices based on objective credit-related criteria but allowed its own loan officers as well as its national network of brokers to adjust those prices without regard to borrower risk, often resulting in black and Latino customers paying more than white borrowers. SunTrust “incentivized discrimination” by sharing the inflated charges with those loan officers and brokers, Perez said. “Those minority borrowers had no idea white customers with similar credit would pay less … That is discrimination with a smile.”

Brokers generally extracted larger overpayments. For example, Latino customers in Dallas borrowing $200,000 through a broker paid about $1,360 more than similarly qualified white borrowers while black customers in Atlanta were charged about $745 more than white voters.

According to the consent decree, SunTrust will be required to put the $21 million into an interest-bearing escrow account. Borrowers in 34 states and the District of Columbia who paid too much will be contacted. Any money left over after borrowers are compensated will be distributed to fair-housing and credit-counseling organizations.

The settlement is pending court approval.

The post SunTrust $21Million Settlement with DOJ appeared first on Weiss Ortiz P.C. .

Housing Discrimination Alive and Well in the 21st Century

Wed, 23 May 2012 17:30:00 GMT

Some people are in denial that in this day and age, discrimination simply does not exist anymore. Taking things at face value, one can see how an individual may be lulled into a false sense of security – legislation designed to protect minorities, affirmative action, et cetera, exist for the advancement of colored peoples in this nation.

However, according to a recent study by the Consumer Action group , all is not fair in home and housing. Consumer Action contacted 5,000 community organizations across the country, compiling information from 549 respondents, who reported “serious issues with housing discrimination.” The survey shows that immigrants, the disabled, and families with children aren’t welcome in some places, and that “immigrants face the greatest hardships in finding legal recourse for housing discrimination.”

One reason, Consumer Action claims, may be cultural barriers. Non-English-speaking minorities could be left out in the cold by unfair housing practices. The study found that “seven out of 10 Community-based organizations (CBOs) say that housing discrimination is a “very serious” or “somewhat serious” problem for the people they serve,” and that “roughly half of CBOs (48 percent) agree that housing discrimination is a “very serious” problem today.”

The study also found that “among the most common barriers to filing discrimination complaints, as reported by CBOs, are factors that specifically concern immigrants, including: “cultural issues, such as the fear of authorities” (59 percent); “language barriers” (54 percent); and “legal status in the U.S.” (56 percent).

Other protected classes, disability (77 percent), race (62 percent) and family status (60 percent) are the top three distinguishing features of individuals seeking help with housing discrimination problems from CBOs.

To make matters worse, Ken McEldowney, Executive Director of Consumer Action, said in a press conference that “two-thirds of the responding community organizations reported people were generally unaware of their rights, affecting their standard of living regardless of what housing they can afford.”

Consumer Action found a pattern across the nation, showing that housing discrimination often bars immigrants, people with disabilities and families with children from living in safer, higher-income neighborhoods they could afford, forcing them instead to move into high-crime areas.

Although our country has made great strides in the effort to provide fair housing for all, it appears that for many of our immigrant communities, fair housing remains unattainable.

The post Housing Discrimination Alive and Well in the 21st Century appeared first on Weiss Ortiz P.C. .

Counting Down to 2015: Banks Looking to the Future to Bring Back the Past

Wed, 16 May 2012 03:51:00 GMT

The National Mortgage Settlement was enacted not just to punish the wrong-doing of the nation’s five biggest lenders, but to create new safeguards to regulate the home buyer’s market. The deal involved Wells Fargo, Bank of America, Citibank, JP Morgan Chase, and Ally Financial to pay an unprecedented $24 billion to fund government programs like the Home Affordable Mortgage Program, or HAMP.

While the effectiveness of these government programs funded by the settlement is being debated, the policies put in place by the settlement are due to expire in 2015. The Huffington Post reports that legal agreements among the banks, and the states and federal government hold for only three-and-a-half years. Good news for the banks. Bad news continues for those facing foreclosure.

But there’s a way around the expiration of the Federal mandates. California Attorney General Kamala Harris, for example, is attempting to make permanent some of the National Mortgage Settlement’s most important “servicing standard” reforms by writing them into state law. “The success of the national mortgage settlement in terms of reforms is laudable, but it only lasts for three years,” Harris said. “We need to make the fixes permanent.” More states should follow California’s proactive idea.

Lenders, however, are fighting back, spending a reported $500,000 in lobbying efforts in the State of California alone during the first three months of 2012. While this display of monetary “shock and awe” tactics seems unnecessary, Lenders are willing to be it all in the high stakes game of politics.

California’s proposed bill, “Homeowner Bill of Rights”, if enacted, would require all banks and servicers in the state to adopt the National Mortgage Settlement reforms. “Dual-tracking,” a procedure by which banks would pursue foreclosure proceedings against homeowners, who, at the same time, are pursuing a trial loan modification, prohibited in the Settlement, would be illegal according to the proposed legislation. Another proposed law that mimics the Settlement would require financial institutions to establish a single point of contact for troubled borrowers — a response to widespread complaints from homeowners that when they called for help, they never could speak to the same person twice.

The Federal Consumer Financial Protection Bureau plans to propose rules this summer that will protect mortgage borrowers “from being hit by costly surprises or getting the runaround from their mortgage servicer.” The agency will finalize those rules in January, it said. Republican presidential nominee Mitt Romney has said that if he were elected, he would try to dismantle the Dodd-Frank Act that created the agency, though that effort would likely face long odds in the U.S. Senate.

With banks spending millions of dollars in an effort to comply with these new regulations, on top of the $24 billion hit they took this past February, lenders are looking for an escape route. Although 2015 is still a long ways away, reminiscing about the lending industry before the national mortgage settlement means looking to the future.

The post Counting Down to 2015: Banks Looking to the Future to Bring Back the Past appeared first on Weiss Ortiz P.C. .

St. Paul Withdraws From US Supreme Court Case Potentially Pivotal To Fair Housing Actions

Tue, 14 Feb 2012 04:08:00 GMT

Last November, we reported on Gallagher v. Magner, 619 F.3d 823, 829 (8th Cir. 2010), and its potentially lethal effect on a cornerstone of Fair Housing actions: disparate impact and the application of the McDonnell-Douglas “burden-shifting” analysis.

However, on Friday, February 10, 2012, the parties withdrew the case from the US Supreme Court just a few weeks before the scheduled argument of February 29. The US Supreme Court granted the withdrawal.

The parties in the case were the City of St. Paul, Minnesota (namely, the Department of Neighborhood Housing and Property Improvement [DNHPI]), and property owners who allege that their homes were targeted by housing code enforcement personnel and their draconian treatment of so-called violations of the housing code. The Plaintiffs brought suit against the City of St. Paul and the DNHPI alleging that the city’s enforcement of its housing code had a disparate impact on minority home and property owners, “whose customers were mainly individuals or families with low incomes, with a large share of them — perhaps 60 to 70 percent — African-American tenants.”

As a cause of action, disparate impact and the McDonnell-Douglas “burden shifting” analysis were indispensible tools in the fight against housing discrimination. During the infancy of the Fair Housing Act, (passed in 1968) Arlington Heights v. Metropolitan Housing Development Corporation decided that the four part “burden shifting” test, first used in McDonnell-Douglas Corp. v. Green and Texas Dept. of Community Affairs v. Burdine , both cases dealing with discrimination in the workplace, could be applied to housing discrimination cases. In the housing context, the Arlington Heights disparate impact claim turned on four factors: 1) A showing of discriminatory effect/impact, 2) Some showing of discriminatory intent, 3) The defendant’s justification, and 4) The relief requested by the plaintiff.

However, the court in Arlington Heights ruled that “official action will not be held unconstitutional solely because it results in a racially disproportionate impact … [such] impact is not irrelevant, but it is not the sole touchstone of an invidious racial discrimination.” Arlington Heights, citing Washington v. Davis, 426 U.S. 229, 242. “A racially discriminatory intent, as evidenced by such factors as disproportionate impact, the historical background of the challenged decision, the specific antecedent events, departures from normal procedures, and contemporary statements of the decision makers, must be shown.”

Proving this discriminatory intent was what made disparate impact cases an invaluable weapon in the fight against housing discrimination. Arlington Heights held that proving discriminatory intent turned on three factors: 1) the impact of a discriminatory law or action by state authorities, 2) if the impact of such law or action is not determinative, other factors, such as legislative or administrative history, and 3) the shifting of the burden of proof to the state to prove it would have adopted the law or regulation at issue without discriminatory motives.

Gallagher v. Magner turned on whether these types of claims could still be brought under the Fair Housing Act. While some believe that such claims have serious issues pertaining to equal protection, the consensus in the fair housing community was that the court would have confirmed that disparate impact claim was a valid theory, but were not sure as to the what test the court would have chosen. Disparate impact continues to live to fight housing discrimination another day.

The post St. Paul Withdraws From US Supreme Court Case Potentially Pivotal To Fair Housing Actions appeared first on Weiss Ortiz P.C. .

Legislators Pass Bills to Expedite Short Sale Process

Thu, 26 Jan 2012 00:40:00 GMT

On January 13, Illinois Senate Bill 1259 was signed by Governor Pat Quinn, requiring banks and lending institutions to respond to a short sale offer by a homeowner within 90 days. The bill also gives courts the authority to hold banks accountable to the 90 day response provision.

Previously, the court had no jurisdiction over banks, allowing them unprecedented control over the foreclosure process. “Families are not losing their homes to foreclosure because they are dead beats refusing to pay their mortgages,” Illinois State Senator Silverstein said on a news release published on his website . “They are people who are struggling to get through the worst economic downturn since the Great Depression. Unfortunately, we are seeing banks stalling the process of a short sale in order to push through foreclosure proceedings, giving families limited options to get out of their mortgage debt.”

In 2010, the number of new short sales late that year had i ncreased nearly 83 percent compared to a year earlier. The Chicago Tribune reports that “as of last October, it was taking lenders an average of 674 days to process a foreclosure, according to Lender Processing Services, a Jacksonville, Fla., mortgage technology firm. That’s more than 22 months, or almost two years from the time the process starts to when the property is actually repossessed. And lenders don’t even start the process until an average of 391 days after last receiving a payment.”

With the Mortgage Forgiveness Debt Relief Act of 2007 set to expire in January 2013 (making it so a homeowners’ unpaid debt settled with a lender through a short sale transaction would be classified as income for tax purposes), the rising tide of the recession would leave some homeowners struggling for air. “Many individuals trying to get out of foreclosure present a short sale offer to the bank and the bank sits on the request causing hardship for the home owner,” Senator Silverstein said. “Not knowing whether the bank will accept the offer causes distress and it is only proper for the bank to respond. This puts a duty on the bank to respond.”

The Illinois Legislature passed Senate Bill 3739 last August, sponsored by State Senator Tony Munoz. SB 3739 codified as 735 ILCS 5/15 1502.5(C). The Bill extends the “30-30-30 Program” for three more years. This program affords homeowners who have been delinquent in their loans a little more time before they get foreclosed upon. Senate Bill 3739 is also known as the “Save Our Neighborhoods Act of 2010.”

Under this program, during the first 30 days a home loan is delinquent, no foreclosure proceedings may be initiated. After a loan is 30 days past due, the loan servicer is required to give notice to a borrower that he or she has 30 days to seek approved credit counseling before legal action may be taken. A borrower is then given another 30 day grace period to develop a sustainable plan to pay their loan on time, but only if he or she seeks counseling services within the allotted timeframe.

Together, these two acts seek to alleviate the pressure placed on homeowners during the worst financial crises this nation has seen since the Great Depression. “During these difficult economic times, we need to do everything we can to help people who have had to miss a mortgage payment stay in their homes,” said Senator Munoz. “This legislation will provide help and services to keep people from going into foreclosure.”

The post Legislators Pass Bills to Expedite Short Sale Process appeared first on Weiss Ortiz P.C. .

US Supreme Court To Hear Disparate Impact Claim

Tue, 22 Nov 2011 06:34:00 GMT

On November 7, 2011, the US Supreme court granted certiorari in Gallagher v. Magner , 619 F.3d 823, 829 (8th Cir. 2010) cert. granted, 10-1032, 2011 WL 531692 (U.S. Nov. 7, 2011).

The case arose out of the Eighth Circuit when several owners and former owners of rental properties in St. Paul, Minnesota brought consolidated actions, challenging the City of St. Paul’s enforcement of its housing code.

In 1993, the City enacted the Property Maintenance Code which “[e]stablishes minimum maintenance standards for all structures and premises for basic equipment and facilities for light, ventilation, heating and sanitation; for safety from fire; for crime prevention; for space, use and location; and for safe and sanitary maintenance of all structures and premises.”

To enforce the code, the City established the Department of Neighborhood Housing and Property Improvement (“DNHPI”) as an executive department responsible for administering and enforcing the Housing Code. DNHPI was empowered to inspect all one- and two-family dwellings and administer and enforce laws regulating maintenance of residential property. This sounds all and well; protect the safety of residents and promotes the general appearance of the city … Until Andy Dawkins, the Director of DNHPI instructed his property inspectors to conduct proactive “sweeps” to detect housing code violations.

Dawkins also instructed his inspectors to “code to the max”, by writing up every violation that the inspectors would see, in addition to complaints about violations brought to the DNHPI’s attention by neighbors and other residents of the City. A “user-friendly” reporting system was also set up to allow neighbors and residents of the city to file complaints.

One can only imagine the ensuing tsunami of strategically-placed “complaints” neighbors could volley at each other, but the DNHPI employed a specific variety of strategies for renter-occupied dwellings. These included orders to correct or abate conditions, condemnations, vacant-building registration, fees for excessive consumption of municipal services, tenant evictions, real-estate seizures, revocations of rental registrations, tenant-remedies actions, and even, court actions.

While the DNHPI may sound like the HOA from Hell, its effects were broad, and far reaching. The DNHPI’s tactics fell heavily on low-income, African-American tenants living in privately-owned housing. The Appellant-Plaintiffs included individuals who own or formerly owned rental properties in the City. These property owners allege that they have suffered increased maintenance costs, fees, condemnations, and were forced to sell properties in some instances, due to as many as ten to twenty-five code violations, which ran the gamut of unsavory living conditions, such as rodent infestations and “inadequate sanitary facilities.”

Specifically, the Appellant-Plaintiffs allege that the City enforced the Housing Code more aggressively with regard to their properties because they rented to a disproportionately high amount of racial minorities, particularly African-Americans.

The 8th Circuit affirmed the lower court’s decision, except for the dismissal of the Appellant-Plaintiff’s disparate impact claim under the Fair Housing Act. The court held that the Appellant-Plaintiffs had satisfied the first query of the McDonnell-Douglas “Burden Shifting Analysis”, by successfully proving a prima facie case which requires showing “that the objected-to action[s] result[ed] in … a disparate impact upon protected classes compared to a relevant population.”

The Judge correctly held that this was shown by four things which he ruled were sufficient to advance a theory of disparate impact:

(a) The City experienced a shortage of affordable housing
(b) Racial minorities, especially African-Americans, made up a disproportionate percentage of lower-income households in the City that rely on low-income housing.
(c) The City’s aggressive Housing Code enforcement practices increased costs for property owners that rent to low-income tenants.
(d) The increased burden on rental-property owners from aggressive code enforcement resulted in less affordable housing in the City.
Gallagher v. Magner , 619 F.3d 823, 835 (8th Cir. 2010).

Thus, the court held that “given the existing shortage of affordable housing in the City, it is reasonable to infer that the overall amount of affordable housing decreased as a result. And taking into account the demographic evidence in the record, it is reasonable to infer racial minorities, particularly African-Americans, were disproportionately affected by these events.” Id .

In contrast, the City argued that “[the] Appellants must do more than show that the Housing Code increases the cost of low-income housing and that African-Americans tend to have lower incomes.” Id . at 836. The court, however, held that in viewing the evidence in the light most favorable to the moving party, “the evidence demonstrates that there is a shortage of affordable housing and that the City’s aggressive code enforcement exacerbated that shortage.” Id .

Turning to the second query of the McDonnell-Douglas test, the court held that “the City has shown that enforcement of the Housing Code promotes the objectives of providing minimum property maintenance standards, keeping the City clean and housing habitable, and making the City’s neighborhoods safe and livable.” Id . at 37.
The game goes into overtime, with the burden once again shifting to the plaintiffs to “offer a viable alternative that satisfies the [City’s] legitimate policy objectives while reducing the … discriminatory impact” of the City’s code enforcement practices.” Id .

To do so, the Plaintiffs used the City’s former program for Housing Code enforcement called “Problem Properties 2000” (“PP2000”). The program’s lists of goals and tactics of included: “identification of properties with a history of unresolved or repeat Housing Code violations, meeting with the owners individually, encouraging the owners to take a more business-like approach to managing their properties, keeping closer tabs on changes of ownership, and using consistent inspectors at each property.” Id . at 838.

Appellant-Plaintiffs contend that PP2000 embodied a flexible and cooperative approach to code enforcement, which achieved the goals of code enforcement while maintaining a consistent supply of affordable housing, something that, the Appellant-Plaintiffs argue, the DNHPI failed to do.

The City argued that this approach would not “reduce the alleged impact on protected class tenants,” and the District Court agreed with them, reasoning that “because participating landlords were not excused from compliance with the Housing Code, they would still incur the same costs of compliance with the housing code, leaving any alleged discriminatory effect on African-Americans unchanged.” Id .

However, the Court disagreed, stating that the Plaintiff-Appellants “offer[ed] evidence that the challenged enforcement practices burdened rental-property owners and thereby reduced affordable housing options. There is also evidence that PP2000 generated a cooperative relationship with property owners, achieved greater code compliance, and resulted in less financial burdens on rental property owners. It is reasonable to infer from these facts, viewed most favorably to Appellants, that PP2000 would significantly reduce the impact on protected class members.” Id .

Thus, the Court of Appeals overruled the District Court’s finding on the issue of disparate impact. The US Supreme Court granted certiorari, and is set to hear the case later this Spring, in 2012. The potential to change the landscape of Fair Housing litigation in this case is huge. The Disparate Impact test has been an invaluable tool in the fight against facially-neutral laws that, as applied, present an onerous burden on a protected class of people. What the Supreme Court will do in this case remains unclear, and the court may or may not strike down the McDonnell-Douglas “Burden Shifting” analysis, as they struck down the Trafficante case earlier this year.

The post US Supreme Court To Hear Disparate Impact Claim appeared first on Weiss Ortiz P.C. .

Civil Rights Legend Passes Away Into History

Thu, 06 Oct 2011 20:17:00 GMT

Derrick Bell, distinguished Civil Rights advocate and father of Critical Race Theory, died today at the age of 80, the New York Times reports .

Bell, the first African-American law professor at Harvard, and the first dean of a non-historically black law school, led an interesting life, influencing our own President Barack Obama, who compared him to bus boycott heroine Rosa Parks. He left Harvard Law School when they refused to change their hiring practices to allow minorities a chance to teach at the famous Ivy League school.

Perhaps more famous for rejecting high positions in education and government than accepting them, Bell once resigned from working at the Civil Rights Division of the Justice Department in his 20s, after his superiors told him to give up his membership in the N.A.A.C.P., believing it posed a conflict of interest.

Professor Bell’s core beliefs included what he called “the interest convergence dilemma” — the idea that whites would not support efforts to improve the position of blacks unless it was in their interest. Asked how the status of blacks could be improved, he said he generally supported civil rights litigation, but cautioned that even favorable rulings would probably yield disappointing results and that it was best to be prepared for that.

Ever the pragmatist, Professor Bell’s teaching style was unique, in that he would forgo dry, boring, legal analyses and employ an allegorical method of teaching. Short stories, fictional characters, and other literary devices marked a successful foray into story writing, an example of such was the short story, “Space Traders”, which appeared in his 1992 book, “Faces at the Bottom of the Well: The Permanence of Racism.” In the story, as Professor Bell later described it, creatures from another planet offer the United States “enough gold to retire the national debt, a magic chemical that will cleanse America’s polluted skies and waters, and a limitless source of safe energy to replace our dwindling reserves.” In exchange, the creatures ask for only one thing: America’s black population, which would be sent to outer space. The white population accepts the offer by an overwhelming margin. (In 1994 the story was adapted as one of three segments in a television movie titled “Cosmic Slop.”)

This teaching style, as revolutionary as it was, did have several critics, one of which was Judge Richard Posner of the United States Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit, who “label[ed] critical race theorists and postmodernists the ‘lunatic core’ of ‘radical legal egalitarianism.’” He writes,

“What is most arresting about critical race theory is that…it turns its back on the Western tradition of rational inquiry, forswearing analysis for narrative. Rather than marshal logical arguments and empirical data, critical race theorists tell stories — fictional, science-fictional, quasi-fictional, autobiographical, anecdotal — designed to expose the pervasive and debilitating racism of America today. By repudiating reasoned argumentation, the storytellers reinforce stereotypes about the intellectual capacities of nonwhites.”

Others lauded Bell’s Critical Race Theory, such as Judge Alex Kozinski, in the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit, who writes that Critical Race Theorists have constructed a philosophy which makes a valid exchange of ideas between the various disciplines unattainable.

“The radical multiculturalists’ views raise insuperable barriers to mutual understanding. Consider the Space Traders story. How does one have a meaningful dialogue with Derrick Bell? Because his thesis is utterly untestable, one quickly reaches a dead end after either accepting or rejecting his assertion that white Americans would cheerfully sell all blacks to the aliens. The story is also a poke in the eye of American Jews, particularly those who risked life and limb by actively participating in the civil rights protests of the 1960s. Bell clearly implies that this was done out of tawdry self-interest. Perhaps most galling is Bell’s insensitivity in making the symbol of Jewish hypocrisy the little girl who perished in the Holocaust — as close to a saint as Jews have. A Jewish professor who invoked the name of Rosa Parks so derisively would be bitterly condemned — and rightly so.”

In addition to his wife, he is survived by three sons from his first marriage, Derrick A. Bell III and Douglas Dubois Bell, both of Pittsburgh, and Carter Robeson Bell of New York; two sisters, Janet Bell of Pittsburgh and Constance Bell of Akron, Ohio; and a brother, Charles, of New York.

The post Civil Rights Legend Passes Away Into History appeared first on Weiss Ortiz P.C. .

Hard Times in the Big Easy for New Orleans Landlord

Wed, 14 Sep 2011 22:06:00 GMT

The ongoing effort to rebuild New Orleans after Hurricane Katrina, some six years ago, continues, but all has not been well on the path to recovery.

A few months ago, we posted a story on “ The Road Home ”, a program which would put thousands of people in newly-constructed homes, but the program was not without its’ faults. This time, however, residents are fighting back against housing discrimination.

The Times-Picayune published news in the beginning of this month stating that a group of New Orleans landlords agreed to pay around $70,000 in damages and penalties to settle various suits against them by prospective tenants. Read the story here .

These lawsuits alleged that the landlords denied housing to African-Americans at an apartment building which makes it ripe for a Fair Housing Act claim. The lawsuit alleges that Betty Bouchon, the building manager, failed to return calls from African-American testers while returning phone calls from white testers, made statements to white testers indicating that she would not rent to black people, and falsely told an African-American tester than an apartment was not available for rent when in fact it was available. One can imagine that the sting was similar to this commercial . See also Stanford professor John Baugh’s study on voice recognition discrimination .

These “tests”, as they are called, have proved instrumental in the fight against housing discrimination, ever since the Fair Housing Act was passed in the late 60’s. Tests involve “control” groups, usually Caucasian men and women, and “experimental” groups, usually consisting of men and women of varying ethnic and racial heritage. The “experimental” groups usually walk in, or otherwise inquire about a property for rent, and the landlord’s response is noted. If the racial or ethnically diverse individual is turned down, a Caucasian person is sent in.

“In these challenging economic times, it is more important than ever that all Americans be able to rent or buy housing they can afford, and not face discrimination because of the color of their skin,” Thomas E. Perez, assistant attorney general for civil rights, said in a statement.

Although the settlement is awaiting approval from a federal circuit court judge in Louisiana, the Defendants, Betty Bouchon, the Bouchon Limited Family Partnership and Sapphire Corp., may also benefit from this settlement, as the consequences may be financially grave for some defendants who lose fair housing cases .

Under the terms of the settlement, the defendants will pay $50,000 to the Greater New Orleans Fair Housing Action Center and $20,000 in civil penalties to the United States. The settlement also requires the defendants to adopt non-discriminatory policies, keep detailed records of inquiries from prospective tenants and of rental transactions, and submit periodic reports over the four-year term of the settlement.

The post Hard Times in the Big Easy for New Orleans Landlord appeared first on Weiss Ortiz P.C. .

Plaintiff wins big in Fair Housing Derby

Sun, 21 Aug 2011 08:50:00 GMT

The New Haven Reporter reported at the end of last month, that a federal judge ruled in favor of Valley Housing LP, Home Development and nonprofit housing developer HOME Inc. Friday in their 2006 lawsuit against the City of Derby, Connecticut, finding that city officials tried to thwart development of a “supportive housing” project for low-income residents with special needs.

The Plaintiffs “provide social services, in addition to affordable housing to allow people with mental and other disabilities to live successfully in the community.” Valley Housing is a limited partnership “created to develop and manage supportive housing for low income disabled people in the Naugatuck Valley of Connecticut.” The partnership combines the efforts of HOME (Housing Operations Management Enterprise), a nonprofit developer, whose mission is to “develop and manage safe, decent and affordable housing for low income people,” and Home Development, Inc., a nonprofit organization created for the “purpose of developing and maintaining supportive housing for low-income people.”

The properties in question involved three buildings zoned as multi-family properties. The Plaintiffs purchased these properties for the purpose of “providing supportive housing for the clients of the Birmingham Group Health Services, Inc. These properties were intended for “persons with mental disabilities, [persons with] a history of substance abuse, and/or HIV/AIDS, capable of independent living and productive community membership with Birmingham Group-provided support services.”

The plan was to relocate the current residents of the buildings, and renovate them to a “high standard.” The number of apartments would remain the same, but each unit would have a reduced number of bedrooms. This was required under CHFA (Connecticut Housing Finance Authority) standards, as “a predicate to the Agency’s commitment to finance the purchase of properties as affordable rental housing for persons with low incomes.”

The Plaintiffs took over two years in locating these properties. Specifically, they sought properties that would not require a zoning change or variance in order to quell neighborhood fears and suppress the cries of NIMBY among the opposition. HOME Inc., was to provide the development and management of the properties, and Valley Housing was contracted by Birmingham Group to be the social services provider for the intended tenants.

The Mayor of Derby at the time, Marc Garofalo, conducted an investigation of the development, once a resident of the area called in to his office to voice their opinion, even going so far as to make a personal appearance at the CHFA to review the Plaintiffs’ application for CHFA funding. His motives weren’t clear at the time, but they came out at trial: he opposed the mutual housing project, and planned on forestalling the development process by blocking its tax credit funding.

Garofalo’s position was that the Plaintiffs could not develop their properties as supportive housing without a process that allowed input from the City and the neighborhood and as a part of a comprehensive scheme for rehabilitating the neighborhood. This process would take upwards of 18 months, and approval was not guaranteed. He knew a similar project in another neighborhood of Derby had not received full financing before.

Garofalo even admitted in trial, that he thought “Derby should have a say in where that kind of housing gets placed.” Garofalo’s plan was orchestrated with the Chairman of the Zoning Board of Appeals, Samuel Rizzitelli. Also involved was David Kopjanski, Derby’s Zoning Enforcement Official and Building Official. These insiders’ insidious intentions were foiled at trial, however, when the court found their testimonies “riddled with inconsistencies, self-serving, and not credible.” Kopjanski denied the Plaintiff’s application for a CZC (Certificate of Zoning Compliance), and asked for the Plaintiffs to apply for a variance with the Zoning Board of Appeals. But, at trial, he admitted that the same Plaintiff’s application, in some instances, actually authorized, in and of itself, a variance. Garofalo also had other motives for his attempt to derail the supportive housing. The neighborhood in which the properties were to be developed expressed vehement opposition, citing “fears and concerns about the prospective occupants.”

The court, however, found that the City of Derby intentionally discriminated against the Plaintiffs under the Fair Housing Act, awarding the Plaintiffs (Valley Housing and Home Development, Inc.) $676,279.65 in compensatory damages. The damage calculation factored in increased construction costs, increased construction contingency, an additional land survey, loan interest, legal services, appraisals, and other administrative costs. HOME, Inc. also received an award for damages: $73,768.78. The amount included staff time, credit for management fees, and borrowing costs.

The post Plaintiff wins big in Fair Housing Derby appeared first on Weiss Ortiz P.C. .

Defense Attorneys Go Home Hungry: Ohio Civil Rights Commission v. Mellon Ridge

Sat, 18 Jun 2011 02:27:00 GMT

The Court of Common Pleas in the County of Warren, Ohio, recently denied defense attorneys’ motion for Attorney’s fees under Fed. R. Civ. P. 11 and R.C. 2323.51 and R.C. 2335.39, in the Ohio Civil Rights Commission v. Mellon Ridge (Case No. 05CV64506 The court denied the fees and said: “Mellon Ridge’s proof of the reasonable and necessary attorney’s fees is problematic in the extreme,” according to the court.

In what started out in the trial phase as a fair housing complaint, Rodney Jackson filed a complaint in the Ohio Civil Rights Commission against Mellon Ridge Residential Care Facility alleging that he had been discriminated against because of his race, and because of the Defendant’s failure to reasonably accommodate his disability. Mr. Jackson required the use of a wheelchair and the services of a service animal, namely, a dog, in order to function.

The court found that the Defendant’s rationale for rejecting Mr. Jackson’s residency was legitimate – Mellon Ridge required proof of vaccinations and health records from a veterinarian before any resident of the facility could be admitted. Thus the court found for the Defendants.

Defendant, Mellon Ridge filed a petition for fees in the amount of $86,668.12. So why didn’t they get it? The Defense even hired “a prominent and well-respected local attorney with many years of litigation experience” to review the billing records and testify at the fee evidentiary hearing. The attorney found that “the amount of fees claimed [were] reasonable and necessary.”

There were billing records, but Defense counsel “…made a calculated choice not to submit his billing records into evidence (in the evidentiary hearing).” Apparently copies of the billing records were made available to the Plaintiffs during discovery, but the Magistrate never saw them. In fact, when asked about the lack of detail in the accounting for attorney’s fees in the evidentiary hearing, Defense counsel stated “I don’t believe the statute requires that kind of explicit detail.”

The only thing even remotely resembling “an itemized list or other evidence of the legal services” required for attorney’s fees under R.C. 2323.51(B)(5) was a short table contained in the Defense’s time affidavit giving the names, the amount of time spent, the hourly rate, and the total amount of fees of each attorney who worked on the case. The court noted, however, that what was NOT included in the time affidavit was “a breakdown of how these hours were spent and what activities were performed.”

Defense counsel was obviously mistaken. The correct way attorney’s fees are calculated per the Lodestar method: the number of hours reasonably expended on a case, multiplied by reasonable attorney’s fees. However, per the Ohio statute, in order to recover attorney’s fees based on frivolous conduct, an itemized list or other evidence of legal services is required.

How could Defense counsel have missed that? The need for an itemized list of legal services being rendered is not mutually exclusive to civil, fair housing cases such as this. The Bankruptcy Code, 11 U.S.C.A. §330, states that “attorney fee applications must include itemized daily entries, with nature and purpose of particular entries noted, with actual time spent on each item, rather than minimum block of time, recorded separately, and abbreviations must be explained.”
The Illinois Appellate Court, Second District, held that “the court is not bound by the attorney’s opinion as to what constitutes a reasonable fee and must inquire into all of the necessary factors. The time spent on a case is the factor of greatest importance. An attorney’s general statement as to the time spent is an insufficient basis for a fee award and detailed time records are usually required. The attorney must itemize both the time expended and the work performed. In re Marriage of Pease, 106 Ill. App. 3d 617, 623, 435 N.E.2d 1361, 1367 (Ill. App. Ct. 1982).

Under Ohio’s R.C. 2323.51 (B)(5), “the party’s counsel of record may submit to the court or be ordered by the court to submit to it, for consideration in determining the amount of reasonable attorney’s fees, an itemized list or other evidence of the legal services rendered, the time expended in rendering the services and the attorney’s fees associated with those services.” (Emphasis added).
The problem with Defense’s request for attorney’s fees is that the court found the basis for the fees – that the Plaintiffs made a frivolous appeal, was that Plaintiff’s appeal was NOT found to be frivolous. The attorney’s fees expended in the appeal phase was therefore unrecoverable, but how could the Magistrate decide what amount to deduct from the fees when there wasn’t a detailed record outlining which of that $86,000 consisted of defending an appeal?

“Absent detailed billing records, any sum would be a mere shot in the dark – arbitrary and capricious,” the court concluded, refusing to make an award of reasonable and necessary attorney’s fees.

Defense counsel missed out on a slice of the Mellon for failure to follow the fee petition rules.

The post Defense Attorneys Go Home Hungry: Ohio Civil Rights Commission v. Mellon Ridge appeared first on Weiss Ortiz P.C. .

Proposed LGBT Protection by HUD

Tue, 01 Mar 2011 19:37:00 GMT

The Department of Housing and Urban Development (“HUD”) has unveiled a series of proposed rule changes that would prohibit lenders from using sexual orientation or gender identity as a way of determining a borrower’s eligibility.

The proposed rule changes will (a) define sexual orientation and gender identity, (b) prohibit inquiries regarding sexual orientation and gender identity, (c) prohibit sexual orientation and gender identity as grounds for decision making in Federal Housing Administration (“FHA”) programs, and (d) would clarify that all eligible families, regardless of marital status, sexual orientation, or gender identity, have the opportunity to participate in HUD programs, including the housing choice voucher program.

The proposed rule changes come in response to information gathered by HUD which suggests that gay, lesbian, bisexual, and transgender (“LGBT”) individuals and families are arbitrarily excluded from housing opportunities because of their sexual preferences and gender identities. The decision by HUD to seek to protect LGBT individuals and families is a controversial decision, but one which is supported by the findings of arbitrary discrimination. One of the primary goals of the Fair Housing Act (“the Act”) is to eliminate arbitrary and invidious discrimination in the area of housing, and HUDs attempt to protect LGBT individuals and families is well in line with the federal goals of the Act and the mission of HUD.

If you wish to review and comment on the proposed rule changes, you can do so at www.regulations.gov .

The post Proposed LGBT Protection by HUD appeared first on Weiss Ortiz P.C. .

How To File A Federal Fair Housing Claim

Mon, 28 Feb 2011 18:32:00 GMT

Housing discrimination based on your race, color, national origin, religion, sex, family status, and disability is illegal by federal law. If you believe that you have been discriminated against in the process of trying to rent or buy a home or apartment, you may file a fair housing complaint.

There are several ways to file a complaint.

You can file an immediate complaint with the Department of Housing and Urban Development (“HUD”), the federal agency which has jurisdiction over matters of fair housing and lending.

To file a complaint, you can call the HUD toll-free number, 1-800-669-9777.
Or you can file your complaint by filling out their online form [http://www.hud.gov/offices/fheo/online-complaint.cfm].

Or you can send a complaint by mail. The HUD website contains the HUD complaint form, and you may wish to accompany your complaint form with a letter. A letter to HUD should including the following information:

• Your name and address
• The name and address of the person your complaint is about
• The address of the house or apartment you were trying to rent or buy
• The date when this incident occurred
• A short description of what happened

The HUD complaint form may be accessed here [http://www.hud.gov/utilities/intercept.cfm?/offices/adm/hudclips/forms/files/903-1.pdf]. Fill it out, and mail it to the address:

Office of Fair Housing and Equal Opportunity
Department of Housing and Urban Development
Room 5204
451 Seventh St. SW
Washington, DC 20410-2000

Not all HUD housing complaints are handled by HUD. Certain states have equivalent housing agencies to which HUD may refer your complaint.

The post How To File A Federal Fair Housing Claim appeared first on Weiss Ortiz P.C. .

Treasure Island Plundered With 3.725 Million Dollar Settlement

Fri, 17 Dec 2010 18:48:00 GMT

In a rare, multi-million dollar settlement, the Code Enforcement Board (CEB) of The City of Treasure Island, agreed to pay the sum of 3.7 million dollars to Gulf Coast Recovery, and its proprietor, Matthew Schwarz in a settlement agreement after several unsuccessful attempts at litigation.

A small city on Florida’s gulf coast, Treasure Island’s population of 7,500 doubles during the winter months; the warm climate and attractive coastal location a favorite of vacationers and “snowbirds” (a Floridian term for retirees from northern states). As a result, the City of Treasure Island’s zoning scheme has come up with unique ordinances to deal with the ebb and flow of its population throughout the year.

The City created a limit on the number of times a “single family or two family dwelling” can change occupancy during a twelve month period in certain areas zoned for single-family dwellings, in order to keep vacationers and snowbirds from disrupting “the sense of community of its permanent residents.”

Gulf Coast Recovery (“GCR”) is a company licensed by the Florida Department of Children and Families to provide outpatient rehabilitation services to recovering drug and alcohol abusers at its treatment facility located In the City of Treasure Island. However, the company’s license does not allow it to provide in-patient or residential treatment. In order to circumvent this limitation, GCR rents or owns property in which its clients stay during the rehabilitation process.

Conflict between GCR and Treasure Island arose when neighbors to one of these properties in which GCR patients stayed, complained about excessive noise and disturbances from GCR patients. In response, Treasure Island sent Schwarz a “Code Enforcement Detail”, observing that Schwarz had “opened up two rehab houses on the island.” Schwarz was then ordered to provide information such as the number of tenants living in the properties Schwarz and GCR owned, the amount of turnover, and the length of the leases.

After some heated disputes with the CEB, Schwarz was determined to have breached the city’s zoning ordinances. Schwarz, GCR, and several of GCR’s patients then sued Treasure Island in the US District Court for the Middle District of Florida, alleging that the city’s zoning code enforcement actions unlawfully discriminated against the residents of the halfway houses.

The case ultimately went to trial. The District Court found in favor of Treasure Island after a motion for summary judgment, stating that the apartments were not “dwellings” and that even if they were assumed to be dwellings, Schwarz and GCR failed to establish intentional discrimination.

On appeal, the 11th Circuit concluded that all the apartments were “dwellings” pursuant to the Fair Housing Act, and remanded the case back to district court to determine whether a fact issue existed as to whether living in the halfway houses was “necessary” to afford recovering substance abusers an “equal opportunity to use and enjoy them.” Schwarz v. City of Treasure Island, 544 F.3d 1201 (11th Cir. 2008).

On remand, Schwarz was successful. A jury verdict passed down in February 2010 held that Treasure Island’s attempt to close the halfway houses violated the fair housing act. After an unsuccessful motion for summary judgment (see Schwarz v. City of Treasure Island, 2010 WL 3747787 (M.D. Fla. Sept. 22, 2010)), Treasure Island decided to settle the case with Schwarz and GCR for more than $3 million dollars. Though Schwarz claimed losses in excess of $7 million dollars, Schwarz found the settlement to be a fair agreement. As part of the settlement, the city also agreed to allow GCR to occupant turnover rates of up to six times per year in a total of four buildings that were zoned for residential, single family dwellings.

The City commission reportedly found the settlement to be “in the best interests of the city”, with the mayor concluding that “everyone is glad [the case] is done with.” One of GCR’s clients was also slated to receive $36,000 as a result of the case as well, for “emotional turmoil” caused by Treasure Island’s code enforcement efforts.

The post Treasure Island Plundered With 3.725 Million Dollar Settlement appeared first on Weiss Ortiz P.C. .

Traffic on The Road Home: Delayed Due to Construction

Thu, 28 Oct 2010 16:52:00 GMT

Some five years after Hurricane Katrina dissipated, its after effects continue to ring out in Louisiana. But the bell tolls louder for some, than others.

The Road Home (TRH) program was designed by former Louisiana Governor Kathleen Blanco, whose mission is “to provide compensation to Louisiana homeowners affected by Hurricanes Katrina or Rita for the damage to their homes.” Claiming themselves to be “the largest single housing recovery program in U.S. history”, The program’s objective is “to provide compensation to Louisiana homeowners affected by Hurricanes Katrina or Rita for the damage to their homes.”

TRH came about as a block grant program to assist in the recovery of the region ravaged by hurricane Katrina. These grants were placed in the State of Louisiana for designation. Approximately $11 billion was allocated for TRH, which was developed by the Louisiana Recovery Authority (LRA). The Department of Housing and Urban Development, or, HUD, also helped develop TRH. HUD is also the governmental entity that disburses funds to the LRA for use in The Road Home program.

Each beneficiary under TRH has a number of options to ease their transition back into New Orleans, one of which is the “Option 1” program, in which each beneficiary receives an award in the amount of either the value of their home before Katrina hit, or the cost of repairing their home, whichever is less. The amount granted would not total more than $150,000. Additional Compensation Grants (ACGs) were made available as supplemental awards for families whose incomes are at or below 80% of the median in their areas, but are still subject to the $150,000 cap.

Despite the laudable goals of the program, however, its administration, allegations of fraud, and race discrimination have left serious doubts about its effectiveness and impartiality.

Of particular concern is the way homes are valued. Families who had homes in economically depressed areas would receive significantly less money from TRH program compared to other families who had homes in more economically prosperous locales.

David Hammer of The Times-Picayune has been following the development of the TRH program. Read the stories here .

In the original case filed in the US District Court of Columbia, Greater New Orleans Fair Housing Action Center v. United States Department of Housing and Urban Development, 2010 U.S. Dist. Lexis 66583 (D.D.C. July 6, 2010), the plaintiffs, individual homeowners and the Greater New Orleans Fair Housing Action Center , alleged that the LRA’s use of pre-storm home values “has a discriminatory disparate impact on African Americans living in historically segregated communities.”

Specifically, the plaintiffs argued that African American homeowners were more likely than white homeowners to own homes with lower values. This makes them more likely to receive less than white homeowners under TRH, between the amount of the grant, and the cost of rebuilding.

As such, the plaintiffs sought an injunction requiring recalculation of TRH awards to homeowners in New Orleans using an alternate formula that does not have a disparate impact on African Americans.

Although the District Judge agreed that the calculation of awards under TRH did have a disparate impact, the court denied the injunction, holding that the court would be unable to “provide the ultimate relief plaintiffs seek”, citing the Eleventh Amendment’s prohibition on lawsuits against state governments without consent from the state, among other reasons.

However, the US Court of Appeals in D.C. reversed the decision, granting the plaintiffs the injunction they sought. The state of Louisiana has been barred from redistributing unused TRH funds for other purposes.

In an interview with David Hammer and The Times-Picayune, James Perry, president of the Greater New Orleans Fair Housing Action Center, said “The appellate court ruling means there is a strong possibility that Judge Kennedy will be able to direct the state to award additional money to people who have already received Road Home grants based on pre-storm value … We’re hopeful it will make clear that additional compensation should be based on cost of repairs, rather than on pre-storm value.”

The LRA, of course, denies any intention of discrimination.

Argument is set over the next few months, before the appellate court, per the State of Louisiana’s appeal over the initial decision.

The injunction has been loosened somewhat to allow for operation of the TRH program, due to a clarification from Judge Kennedy . “The state said 382 buyout grants — so-called Option 2 and Option 3 grants, like Bailey’s — can move forward. So too can 784 supplemental payments for homeowners who have already received initial grants under Option 1”, according to Hammer.

However, there are still 85 initial Option 1 grants based on pre-storm value that must remain frozen while appeals of Kennedy’s official ruling are pending.

Much like the FEMA debacle, it seems that the road to recovery for New Orleans is fraught with obstacles and potholes to overcome. While the courts have been relegated to repair the damaged process of home valuation, it seems that some on The Road Home, have to deal with more delays.

The post Traffic on The Road Home: Delayed Due to Construction appeared first on Weiss Ortiz P.C. .

Can Landlords Discriminate Based on Arrest Records?

Fri, 15 Oct 2010 22:15:00 GMT

Marie Claire Tran-Leung disagrees. According to Tran-Leung, “Landlords and local housing authorities should stop using arrest records to screen tenants.” She states that doing so does “more harm than good.”

Although it is illegal for landlords to discriminate based on race, color, religion, sex, national origin, disabilities, and other protected classes under the Federal Fair Housing Act, most states have also applied protection to other classes. For example, the State of Illinois prohibits discrimination based on ancestry, age, marital status, and sexual orientation. Discrimination against people with arrest records, however, is legal.

But should it be? Tran-Leung claims that discrimination based on arrest records “give[s] people a false sense of security against crime, and they deprive disproportionately more racial minorities of needed rental housing for nothing more than an unproven accusation.” Read the full story here .

Tran-Leung cites a recent decision by the Illinois Appellate Court, Landers v. Chi. Hous. Auth. , 2010 Ill. App. LEXIS 1010 (Ill. App. Ct. 1st Dist. Sept. 20, 2010), supports for advocating a ban on discrimination based on arrest records.

Landers was a case about a man who had been arrested no more than 34 times while he was homeless. Placed on the Chicago Housing Authority’s (CHA) wait list for public housing in 1995, he finally got his turn in 2008. However, after thirteen years of waiting for a chance to live in public housing, he was turned down by the CHA because of his arrest record.

After undergoing an informal review (per CHA regulations), to dispute his arrest record, the CHA still denied him housing. The Illinois Appellate Court for the First District held that because his arrest record did not contain any convictions, or circumstances outlining his arrests, they did not meet the definition of “the requisite violent crimes or drug-related criminal activity necessary to constitute a criminal activity.”

The case itself doesn’t stand for the proposition that the CHA may not discriminate based on arrest records, rather, the 1st District Appellate Court held that arrest records which do not contain convictions or have any background information as to why the person was arrested, does not constitute “criminal activity.”

Examples of what constitutes “violent criminal activity” that can be the basis of turning someone down for housing are including, but not limited to, “homicide, murder, vandalism, burglary, armed robbery, theft, trafficking, manufacture, or use of illegal drugs …”

In this case, Landers was charged and arrested for numerous crimes related to being homeless. He also denied that he committed those offenses (instead, he attributed them to a twin brother). All but one charge for drinking in public resulted in conviction.

The court explicitly stated that they did not dispute the CHA’s ability to deny housing to an individual based on their convictions and substantiated arrests. However, in this case, the court held there was no evidence that Landers was a potential threat to the “health, safety, and welfare of the public housing community,” concluding that “the sheer number of petitioner’s arrests does not establish a history of criminal activity.”

While this case opens up some avenues of justice for those who have been arrested, but not convicted of certain crimes, the CHA is still able to discriminate based on past, substantiated convictions. This still leaves out a large number of people who have served time in correctional facilities.

Tran-Leung argues that rejection of housing to individuals with spotty arrest records unfairly denies people housing, and that “to prevent this outcome, HUD should bar housing authorities and private owners participating in HUD programs from using arrests to screen applicants.”

This, however, leaves some concerns about possible public safety concerns. So is there a better way? Perhaps, but for many with arrest records, this case leaves them out in the cold.

The post Can Landlords Discriminate Based on Arrest Records? appeared first on Weiss Ortiz P.C. .

Race discrimination suspected in couple’s delay to sell home

Mon, 23 Aug 2010 05:14:00 GMT

http://www.afro.com/sections/arts_entertainment/story.htm?storyid=2212

The post Race discrimination suspected in couple’s delay to sell home appeared first on Weiss Ortiz P.C. .

July 19-25 News Round-Up

Tue, 10 Aug 2010 06:04:00 GMT

http://www.justice.gov/opa/pr/2010/July/10-crt-826.html

Fair Housing Report released at conference in New Orleans:
The Department of Housing and Urban Development releases first annual report of the state of fair housing which provides the progress being made in enforcing the Fair Housing Act and expresses the current administration’s commitment to ending housing discrimination. The report ,prepared in accordance with Sections 808(e)(2) and (6) of the Fair Housing Act and Section 561(j) of the Housing and Community Development Act of 1987, was released during HUD’s National Fair Housing Policy Conference in New Orleans July 19-23. According to the report the most prevalent type of housing discrimination continues to be complaints dealing with disability issues, making up 44% of complaints with 31% race and 20% familial status. The report also includes recent changes in policy, and provides cases that were resolved through the HUD process. Recent cases can be found in the report available at http://www.hud.gov/content/releases/fy2009annual-rpt.pdf .

The post July 19-25 News Round-Up appeared first on Weiss Ortiz P.C. .

Recent Cases (cont.)

Mon, 19 Jul 2010 20:01:00 GMT

Petty v. Portofino Council of Co-Owners, Inc., 2010 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 22935 (March 12, 2010)

Ojo v. Farmers Group, Inc., 600 F.3d 1201 (9th Cir. 2010)

African American homeowner, Patrick O. Ojo complained that the Farmers Group insurance practices resulted in disparate treatment under FHA as a result of insurance company’s use of credit scores as a qualifying factor in determining insurance rate. Complainant claims that using credit scores factor that had a “racially disparate impact”

The district court found that the there was reverse preemption under the McCarran-Ferguson Act (MFA) 15 USC § 1012 (b) and Texas Insurance Code sections 544.002; 544.002, 559.051 and 559.052 . According to the MFA no federal law can “invalidate or impair or supersede” any state law made to regulate the insurance business. In other words, the state law, in this case the Texas Insurance Code which permits the use of credit scoring, allows the insurers to get around the FHA law against disparate impact on minorities because the Texas Insurance Code permissive law. In this case the state law would pre-empt the federal law. In most cases, it is the federal law which pre-empts the state law.

Ojo appealed and the three judge panel reversed the decision and held that “Texas law does not reverse preempt” the FHA claim. However the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals ultimately certified the unprecedented question of whether the Texas Insurance Code, in fact, reverse preempts (or overrides) the FHA claim because it has a “legally sufficient non-discriminatory reason” under the Insurance Code for using the credit scoring factor resulting in disparate impact.

The post Recent Cases (cont.) appeared first on Weiss Ortiz P.C. .

Recent Cases

Tue, 13 Jul 2010 20:38:00 GMT

Marshall Fincher v. South Bend Heritage Foundation, 606 F.3d 331 (7th Cir. 2010)

The Plaintiff brought a complaint against both the South Bend Housing Authority and the South Bend Heritage Foundation. The case against the Housing Authority was remanded to the state courts because the eviction process involved in the claim against the state agency is inherently a state issue. In the complaint against SBHF the plaintiff stated that did not have the opportunity to exercise his due process rights and that he was a party to the contract between the landlord and HUD because he was the recipient of the benefit.

The Appellate Court denied both claims. Pertaining to the first claim, the plaintiff concedes that there is well established case law for the 7th Circuit in Edison v. Pierce, 745 f.2d 453 (7th Cir. 1984) which states that recipients of Section 8 benefit have no right to due process when rejected from a specific housing unit, however, he asks that the Court overturn this precedent. With no new changes in law or flaws in the reason of the case exist to justify a overturn the Court’s previous decision. Secondly the Court rejected Fincher’s claim that he is third party-beneficiary to the contract between SBHF and HUD because he did not produce the contract or identify and any provisions (as required to establish an issue of law) that would establish the basis of his claim.

Equal Rights Center v. Archstone Multifamily Series I Trust, 602 F.3d 597 (4th Cir 2010)

The Equal Rights Center brought a claim against Archstone, Niles Bolton, and others for failure to comply with the FHA and ADA in the design and construction of 71 apartment buildings. Archstone, the apartment owners, sought to indemnify themselves against FHA and ADA by making the architect liable. The owners appealed and the appellate court affirmed the District Court’s decision to grant a summary judgment to the defendant, and deny the owner the motion to amend the complaint for contribution. The 4th Circuit Court of Appeals stated that the law was “non-delegable” and that the owner could not insulate himself from responsibility to meet requirements and that the purpose of both the FHA and ADA would have been undermined by allowing the architect to be held liable because it would not make the intended parties accountable or responsive to the law.

Finally, Archstone attempted to amend its complaint to include a claim for contribution, which the district court denied because it changed the nature of the claim regarding the liability and would therefore require additional discovery and “change the character of the litigation”, the appellate court agreed and affirmed the district ‘ decision to deny the amendment.

The post Recent Cases appeared first on Weiss Ortiz P.C. .

HUD Acts to Strengthen Anti-Discrimmination Policies in Recognition of LGBT Pride Month

Tue, 13 Jul 2010 19:44:00 GMT

The post HUD Acts to Strengthen Anti-Discrimmination Policies in Recognition of LGBT Pride Month appeared first on Weiss Ortiz P.C. .

News Roundup: March 27 – April 2

Fri, 09 Apr 2010 20:36:00 GMT

HUD Kicks Off Fair Housing Month Declaring 2010 a “Time to Act”
In an April 1st press release, HUD highlighted its achievements from last year and proclaimed its continuing commitment to ensure Fair Housing for all in the year to come.

“Discrimination based on how you look, the religion you practice, or because you have children or are disabled is illegal and unacceptable,” said John Trasviña, Assistant Secretary for Fair Housing and Equal Opportunity at HUD. “In the aftermath of Dr. Martin Luther King Jr.’s assassination in April 1968, President Johnson moved for passage of the Fair Housing Act to bring the nation forward and together. Since then, we have made progress but there remains work to be done. It is time to act.” ( Full Press Release Here )

While such a case might seem to elicit sympathy, whether such circumstances demand the force of law seems unlikely. ( Full Article Here )

The cost is $300 and Attorneys can receive 10 CLE credits. To register contact Maria Chavez at (312) 427-9438 or mchavez@jmls.edu. ( Full News-brief Here )

The post News Roundup: March 27 – April 2 appeared first on Weiss Ortiz P.C. .

News Roundup: March 15-26

Tue, 30 Mar 2010 18:46:00 GMT

Press Release

“Online Suggestion Box”

Chicago Examiner Article

Fox News

Full Article Here

Baltimore Sun Review

The post News Roundup: March 15-26 appeared first on Weiss Ortiz P.C. .

News Roundup: March 8-14

Tue, 30 Mar 2010 18:28:00 GMT

calls on federal lawmakers

Joe Sestak announced the submission of his Housing Non-Discrimination Act

Jerrold Nadler of NY and John Conyers of Michigan have also voiced their support of such a measure

See here for analysis of the original dismissal.

The post News Roundup: March 8-14 appeared first on Weiss Ortiz P.C. .

What Obama’s Proposed Inclusionary LGBT Housing Rule Does and Does Not Do

Wed, 10 Mar 2010 19:07:00 GMT

The U.S. Housing and Urban Development Department conducted a listening session on Thursday in an effort to gather input on how to design the first-ever national survey of LGBT housing discrimination. The session was hosted at Chicago’s city hall and included over a dozen members of the gay community, fair housing advocates and government officials who shared their stories and perspectives on the issue. ( Full Washington Post article here ).

One concern expressed the need for testers to “think of a way to make it clear that this is a gay couple and not just two men who really can’t afford to do anything than get a single apartment with a single room,” said John Knight of the ACLU.

This marks one of the first steps by HUD to fulfill their promise made in October of assuring the LGBT community inclusion in HUD programs. ( Full Press Release Here ).

In that press release HUD Secretary Shaun Donovan announced, “The evidence is clear that some are denied the opportunity to make housing choices in our nation based on who they are and that must end. President Obama and I are determined that a qualified individual and family will not be denied housing choice based on sexual orientation or gender identity.”

The administration intends to achieve this goal in three ways:
1) through the promulgation of a rule that clarifies the term “family” in HUD’s public housing and Housing Choice Voucher programs to include otherwise eligible LGBT individuals and couples; 2) require grantees and those who participate in the Department’s programs to comply with local and state non-discrimination laws that cover sexual orientation or gender identity; 3) specify that any FHA-insured mortgage loan must be based on the credit-worthiness of a borrower and not on unrelated factors or characteristics such as sexual orientation or gender identity.

As evidence that this is an issue of national concern, Michigan in 2007 issued a report finding that nearly 30 percent of same-sex couples were treated differently when seeking housing ( Michigan’s full report here ).

What does this mean for the LGBT and fair housing communities?

First, the rule does not change the Federal Fair Housing Act to include the LGBT community. LGBT persons can still be denied the sale or rental of housing on the basis of this status under federal law. While many people have expressed disappointment with this deficiency in the proposed rule, such a revision of the FHA would almost certainly be struck down in the federal courts on the basis that the President exceeded his executive powers in an attempt to legislate from the White House. The only promulgation I could conceive of as possibly escaping this Separation of Powers issue is HUD rule defining the meaning of “sex” to include gay, lesbian, bi, and transgender persons. While court’s are required to grant Administrative agencies great deference in their interpretations of statutes, the courts would likely strike the rule down as an abuse of discretion in statutory interpretation.

Though the rule does not propose to change the FHA, the commissioned national study likely has that purpose. The release of that report will be used by LGBT and equal rights interest groups to place pressure on the legislature to pass an LGBT inclusive amendment. It is important to note however that while federal law is deficient in this area, 17 states and 80 cities have included LGBT provisions in their own housing laws.

Second, as many are unaware, The Housing Choice Voucher Program refers to what is more widely known as Section 8 housing. The proposed rule would make it illegal for HUD to discriminate against the LGBT community in the distribution of these housing subsidies. Presently, HUD agents could deny such vouchers to LGBT couples on the basis that they do not fit within the program’s definition of family; hence the rule clarifying what “family” actually means in order to include LGBT persons.

Third, if my reading of the press release is accurate, the new rule would require landlords receiving section 8 vouchers to comply with those state and municipal laws that have LGBT inclusive provisions.

Finally, the rule would prohibit the Federal Housing Administration, a government agency created in 1934 under the National Housing Act to provide home financing through the insurance of mortgage loans, from discriminating against the LGBT community in the granting of FHA-insured mortgages. More on FHA insured mortgages here.

The post What Obama’s Proposed Inclusionary LGBT Housing Rule Does and Does Not Do appeared first on Weiss Ortiz P.C. .

Children in Search of a Place to Play

Tue, 09 Mar 2010 23:49:00 GMT

While the bylaws prohibit anyone from playing organized sports on the grounds of the complex, the condo association is being sued for discriminatory enforcement of condo rules against families with children. See full article here.

The post Children in Search of a Place to Play appeared first on Weiss Ortiz P.C. .

More Stringent Standard for Organizational Standing and the Need to Keep an Eye on this Issue.

Tue, 09 Mar 2010 23:21:00 GMT

Equal Rights Ctr. v. Post Props. 657 F. Supp. 2d 197 (D.D.C. 2009)

Decided September 28, 2009

This case stands on the principle that organizational standing is not available when an organization’s injury is self-inflicted. Whether we are seeing a more stringent principle being promulgated, a refinement in the law or a case of bad strategy is unclear.

Equal Rights Center (“ERC”), an organization devoted to advancing civil rights and fair housing for everyone, brought suit against Post Properties for allegedly failing to bring their buildings into compliance with accessibility provisions in the American Disabilities Act (“ADA”) and Fair Housing Act (“FHA”). Post Properties owns and manages more than 21,000 apartment units across five states. According to the Court’s description of the facts, ERC, on its own accord, chose to investigate one of Post’s buildings to determine whether they were in compliance with accessibility laws.

The issue in the case is not whether Post actually violated accessibility laws but whether ERC had the authority to file suite and come before the court as an organization. To get before a court of law, Article III of the Constitution requires the plaintiff to have “suffered a concrete and particularized injury that is actual or imminent, traceable to the challenged act, and redressable by [the] court.” Lujan v. Defenders of Wildlife, 504 U.S. 555 (1992).

Whether organizations have standing to sue on behalf of injured persons is not at issue here. The issue is whether organizations have standing in their own right, independent of its individual member’s injury. While injury to an organization representing the interests of a particular class of persons may seem less concrete and particularized than that of an individual who is unable to rent from Post because a unit’s doorway is not wide enough to fit a wheelchair, the Supreme Court has granted organizations standing before the court without necessarily creating a special exception . Haven’s Realty Corp v. Coleman , 455 U.S. 363 (1982).

In Haven’s , the Court ruled that a nonprofit corporation devoted to equal housing access had standing against a defendant’s racial steering practices because steering frustrated its mission to assist minorities in accessing housing. Id. Additionally, the nonprofit, in providing such services, had to expend substantial resources in identifying violations of the law in the community they served. Even if no economic resources had been expended, the court noted that an organization is not deprived of organizational standing when the alleged injury results from the organization’s non-economic interest in encouraging open housing. The nonprofit merely has to demonstrate that it “suffered impairment in its role of facilitating open housing.” Id. at 379.

According to the court in Equal Rights Center, the standing doctrine in Haven’s does not however extend to where a plaintiff’s injury “merely consists of the impact on its activities caused by their willful diversion of resources in response to the defendants’ conduct .” Equal Rights Ctr. v. Post Props. 657 F. Supp. 2d 197 (D.D.C. 2009) . Thus, organizational standing will not be found when the injury to the plaintiff is said to be purely self-inflicted and arising solely out of their own decision to expend resources. Id. at 201.

Through its interpretation of the discovery proceedings, the court here determined that ERC essentially conceded that its injuries were caused by its own decision to investigate the Defendant. This lead to the finding that ERC’s injuries were purely self-inflicted and thus falling outside the scope of standing law provided in Haven’s.

Whether this decision marks a tightening of Organizational Standing law or wrong strategy is unclear. It seems that the court should have recognized that ERC’s ability to provide the service of referring persons to handicapped accessible housing was impaired by the Defendant’s alleged failure to comply with accessibility standards. The fewer handicapped accessible units (required by law) within a community, the more difficult it will be for ERC to fulfill its mission of providing equal housing to persons with a handicap. It is also possible; however, that ERC did not sufficiently plead this injury; in which case, the court is not required to supplement deficiencies on behalf of either party. (While the true facts of the suite are unclear, it is always prudent to file a case with a bona-fide plaintiff who was looking for accessible housing and join them in the claims against Defendant).

On the other hand, this case, if appealed, may change the interpretation of the long standing requirements set forth in Haven’s . Perhaps this case represents a movement away from finding organizational standing in situations where the injury to an organization’s mission is less concrete.

The post More Stringent Standard for Organizational Standing and the Need to Keep an Eye on this Issue. appeared first on Weiss Ortiz P.C. .

$7.4 Million Retrofitting Case

Fri, 05 Mar 2010 20:37:00 GMT

Retrofitting housing units to comply with accessibility requirements under the FHA for persons with disabilities is expensive. A.G. Spanos Companies, the nation’s fifth-largest housing developer, understands this fact quite well after settling for an estimated $7.4 million for non-compliance with FHA building standards.

According to the press release, “Under the agreement, the nation’s fifth largest builder of residential real estate will retrofit properties in Arizona, California, Colorado, Georgia, Florida, Kansas, Missouri, Nevada, New York, North Carolina, and Texas at an estimated cost of $7.4 million.”

The FHA provides that since 1991 new construction of multifamily dwellings with four or more units be required to have accessible ground floor units where there is no elevator and accessibility for all units in buildings with an elevator. This is true for both public and private housing except in rare instances where steep terrain makes accessibility standards impracticable.

It is not uncommon, as was the case here, for city building inspectors to approve new construction of housing developments that do not comply with the FHA. This just shows how disparate local building codes are from the FHA requirements. The Fair Housing Accessibility First Initiative was designed to promote compliance nationwide with the FHA. The present settlement will contribute to this initiative in numerous ways that are detailed in the Press Release.

The post $7.4 Million Retrofitting Case appeared first on Weiss Ortiz P.C. .

Obama’s Assurance of Housing Equality to the LGBT Community Only a Small Step Forward

Fri, 12 Feb 2010 22:28:00 GMT

In case you missed this important housing news back in October, the Obama Administration released a statement assuring the LGBT community inclusion in HUD programs ( Full Press Release Here ). But there appears to be a gaping hole in the proposed administrative rule.

HUD Secretary Shaun Donovan announced “The evidence is clear that some are denied the opportunity to make housing choices in our nation based on who they are and that must end. President Obama and I are determined that a qualified individual and family will not be denied housing choice based on sexual orientation or gender identity.”

The administration intends to achieve this goal in three ways:
1) Through the promulgation of a rule that clarifies the term “family” in HUD’s public housing and Housing Choice Voucher programs to include otherwise eligible LGBT individuals and couples.
2) Require grantees and those who participate in the Department’s programs to comply with local and state non-discrimination laws that cover sexual orientation or gender identity
3) Specify that any FHA-insured mortgage loan must be based on the credit-worthiness of a borrower and not on unrelated factors or characteristics such as sexual orientation or gender identity.

HUD also promised to commission the first-ever national study of housing discrimination against members of the LGBT community.

What the proposal does not do is change the Fair Housing Act. Se

The post Obama’s Assurance of Housing Equality to the LGBT Community Only a Small Step Forward appeared first on Weiss Ortiz P.C. .

$160,000 Settlement Reached Over Racial Steering Complaint in Atlanta

Mon, 08 Feb 2010 22:50:00 GMT

Atlanta area realtors settled with the Justice Department on Feb. 3, 2010 over allegations of racially steering prospective home-buyers. The complaint, filed by HUD and the National Fair Housing Alliance, resulted in an investigation which reported that agents were steering white testers away from predominately black neighborhoods because of race. One tester reported that an agent wasn’t sure what area to take the prospective home-buyer because he could not tell the testers race from their phone conversation.

Full article here.

The post $160,000 Settlement Reached Over Racial Steering Complaint in Atlanta appeared first on Weiss Ortiz P.C. .

HUD Grants $26 Million to Fair Housing Organizations

Fri, 05 Feb 2010 23:03:00 GMT

In an effort to continue fighting housing discrimination, HUD once again distributes funds to local fair housing agencies across the country.

HUD Press Release

The post HUD Grants $26 Million to Fair Housing Organizations appeared first on Weiss Ortiz P.C. .

7th Circuit Carves out More Space for Post-Acquisition FHA Claims

Sat, 30 Jan 2010 00:59:00 GMT

Bloch v. Frischholz, 587 F.3d 771(7th Cir. 2009)

Decided November 13, 2009

The 7th Circuit Court of Appeals unanimously held in Bloch v. Frischholz, that the Fair Housing Act (FHA) protects persons from discrimination not only before, but also after housing has been acquired. Though bright-line rules were not necessarily developed, the court discusses three provisions through which post-acquisition claims can now more clearly be established.

Since 2004, after the Court’s decision in Halprin v. Prairie Single Family Homes , the Fair Housing law in the 7th Circuit concerning post-acquisition conduct has been construed very narrowly because as the court stated,”the FHA by and large [is] concerned only [with] access to housing.” Id. Halprin has lead many courts to focus on the timing of the discrimination rather than whether discrimination actually occurred. Bloch, to a certain extends, clarifies this area of the law by ruling that the FHA reaches a “range of post-acquisition conduct.” Bloch v. Frischhol.

The plaintiff’s in Bloch claimed that the condo association’s refusal to allow Jewish members to affix a mezuzah (religious symbol) to their door posts violated three provisions of the FHA under post-acquisition legal theories. The court addresses each claim:

Claim 1 – Post-Acquisition Unavailability Through Constructive Eviction

Section 3604(a) of the FHA makes it unlawful “to refuse to sell or rent after the making of a bona fide offer, or to refuse to negotiate for the sale or rental of, or otherwise make unavailable or deny, a dwelling to any person because of race, color, religion, sex, familial status, or national origin.”

This provision is focused on access to housing and is not necessarily targeted at post-acquisition conduct; however, should the post-acquisition discriminatory conduct effectively deny access to already-owned or rented property, 3604(a) may be violated. The plaintiffs argued that the Association’s religious discrimination amounted to “constructive eviction,” a doctrine in real property whereby a landlord renders property unavailable due to a failure to perform a legal duty (provide heat or water). The issue here is whether by refusing to allow the Bloch’s to place the mezuzah outside their door, the association constructively evicted the Bloch’s on the basis of religion because the Jewish faith requires the ability of followers to affix a mezuzah to their doorposts.

The issue rested on the court’s interpretation of “unavailable.” In a case of constructive eviction, the plaintiff must show that the residence is “unfit for occupancy,” often to the point that one is “compelled to leave.” (Citing Black’s Law Dictionary). The Bloch Court provided that diminution of property values, blatant discriminatory acts, or the lack of an elevator service does not cross the unavailability threshold. On the other hand, changing the locks of a tenant without providing the key because of race, or not providing heat on the basis that the tenant has children, would amount to unavailability.

Inseparable from any argument as to whether a unit is unavailable is the question of whether the plaintiff vacated the premises. While the court in Bloch does not establish a bright line rule requiring that the plaintiff vacated the unit, it appears that the plaintiff must either provide evidence that they vacated, or had an intent to vacate the premises but were unable to do so. The Court appears to establish a reasonableness standard in stating that since the the Blochs neither vacated nor provided a reason why they failed to vacate, a reasonable jury would be unable to find that the Association made the unit unavailable.

Thus, a post-acquisition claim under section 3604(a) requires that the premises be made effectively unavailable to its residents because of race, color, religion, sex, familial status, or national origin, and that the residents left the premises or intended to leave but were unable to do so.

Claim 2 – The Right to Inhabit as a Privilege of Sale and Abuse of Contractual Powers.

Section 3604(b) makes it unlawful “[t]o discriminate against any person in the terms, conditions, or privileges of sale or rental of a dwelling, or in the provision of services or facilities in connection therewith, because of race, color, religion, sex, familial status, or national origin.”

First, the court finds that a 3604(b) allows for the same constructive eviction theory as under 3604(a) because the availability of housing already acquired is a privilege of sale. Making the premises unavailable is therefore a deprivation of one’s right to privileges of sale.

Additionally, a post-acquisition claim can be made under 3604(b) where a resident agrees to subject themselves to rules imposed by a Board as a condition of the housing housing purchase. Should the board enforce those rules in a discriminatory fashion, there may be a 3604(b) violation. For example, if a condo association board rules against leaving trash cans outside a resident’s unit, but only penalizes black residents for breaking the rule, the black residents will have a valid post-acquisition 3604(b) claim.

Here, if the Bloch’s can show that the condo association selectively enforced, or expanded the scope of the rule in order to specifically target the Bloch’s use of the mezuzah , they may prevail on the 3604(b) claim.

Claim 3: Denial of the Right to Full Enjoyment of Premises

Section 3617 makes it unlawful “to coerce, intimidate, threaten, or interfere with any person in the exercise or enjoyment of, or on account of his having exercised or enjoyed, or on account of his having aided or encouraged any other person in the exercise or enjoyment of, any right granted or protected by section 3603, 3604, 3605, or 3606 of this title.”

The language of 3617 on its face seems to suggest that for a 3617 action to be valid, the plaintiff must possess a separate cause of action under 3603-3606, of which they tried to exercise, and were later discriminated against on the basis of having that right. A post-acquisition claim under this reading would require one of the above two post-acquisition theories to be satisfied before a 3617 action could be pursued (except with handicapped cases). This provision is usually violated when a person is denied housing on the basis of race (3604) etc. and then is threatened not to pursue legal action for that denial (3617).

However, the court Bloch expands this meaning to allow for a 3617 claim independent of any other FHA cause of action. This decision almost has the effect of overruling Halprin in that it protects a residents right against discrimination that interferes with the enjoyment of their already acquired housing. This reading is consistent with the intent of the FHA’s purpose to “replace the ghettos by truly integrated and balanced living patterns.” Trafficante v. Metro. Life Ins. Co., 409 U.S. 205 (1972). Additionally, the court cites HUD’s interpretation of 3617 which prohibits “interfering with persons in their enjoyment of a dwelling because of the race [or] religion . . . of such persons.” 24 C.F.R. 100.400(c)(2).

While the extent of this protection is to be worked out in the years to come, the court did provide a four part test for 3617 claims: The plaintiff must show that (1) she is a protected individual under the FHA, (2) she was engaged in the exercise or enjoyment of her fair housing rights, (3) the defendants coerced, threatened, intimidated, or interfered with the plaintiff on account of her protected activity under the FHA (“Interference” is more than a “quarrel among neighbors” or an “isolated act of discrimination,” but rather is a “pattern of harassment, invidiously motivated.”), and (4) the defendants were motivated by an intent to discriminate.

(The Bloch case was remanded and the case is pending before the district court.)

The post 7th Circuit Carves out More Space for Post-Acquisition FHA Claims appeared first on Weiss Ortiz P.C. .

FHA Reverse Redlining and Pleading Standards

Thu, 28 Jan 2010 23:46:00 GMT

United States District Court, N.D. California
Hafiz v. Greenpoint Mortg. Funding, Inc.
652 F.Supp.2d 1039
July 16, 2009

Hafiz is significant to fair housing law because it re-articulates the manner in which a predatory-lending/reverse-redlining claim can be made under the FHA. It also shows how some courts are using the new more stringent pleading standards under Iqbal to dismiss federal claims.

Plaintiff Majiman Hafiz’s investment property was subject to foreclosure after falling behind in her monthly mortgage payments. In order to prevent the foreclosure sale of her property, Plaintiff alleged in her complaint that Defendant, Greenpoint Mortgage, failed to give her adequate time for review of the loan documents. Plaintiff also alleged that Defendant failed to disclose mortgage-related information as required by state and federal law. Plaintiff claimed that these alleged acts of excessive fee structures and failed disclosures on behalf of defendants resulted in the issuance of a loan which was subject to a repayment schedule that would eventually “outstrip” her ability to pay.

Among numerous other alleged violations, plaintiff claimed that defendants violated the Fair Housing Act under the theory of “reverse-redlining” which makes it unlawful for lenders to offer credit to certain classes, people groups, or geographic areas on terms less favorable to persons outside of the targeted people group. Should a lender only offer adjustable rate mortgages to persons of color buying in a particular neighborhood while offering fixed rate mortgages with lower interest rates to whites in the same or different area, such would likely constitute reverse redlining. Redlining on the other hand was the denial of any financial services to persons based on race, etc.

In Hafiz , the court provided a four part test for reverse-redlining violations under the FHA: (1) plaintiff is a member of a protected class; (2) plaintiff applied and was qualified for the loans; (3) the loans were given on grossly unfavorable terms; and (4) that the lender either intentionally targeted plaintiff for unfair loans or currently makes loans on more favorable terms to others. Id. at 1046.

The Court found no FHA violation because the complaint fell short of the relatively new fact pleading threshold requirements under Ashcroft v. Iqbal 129 S.Ct. 1937 (2009). Instead of pleading sufficient factual findings, the plaintiff merely stated legal conclusions of being extended less favorable loans than “Caucasian counterparts.” Accordingly, these conclusions were considered to be “couched as factual allegations which are not entitled to a presumption of truth.” Id. at 1046. The reverse-redlining claim was ordered insufficient to overcome the motion to dismiss.

The post FHA Reverse Redlining and Pleading Standards appeared first on Weiss Ortiz P.C. .

Fair Housing 40 Years Later

Thu, 28 Jan 2010 23:21:00 GMT

Provided is news story addressing the issue of fair housing law over the last 40 years.

Link with video .

The post Fair Housing 40 Years Later appeared first on Weiss Ortiz P.C. .

Ho. v. HUD

Mon, 06 Jul 2009 14:05:00 GMT

Chak Man Fung was the owner of an apartment that rented to three individuals one of them was Jennifer Ho. Ho acted as Ho’s agent when choosing renters. When Diana Lin decided to move out before her lease was up she found Meki Brachen to move in. Lin said she would not rent to blacks, additional Fung would also not allow Brachen to move in and barred any attempts. Ho and Meki Brachen filed racial discrimination charges against Fung and Lin.
Several notifications by first class mail and Fed Ex were sent out and neither defendant answered. Finally after a fourth notification, Ho, but not Fung showed up for a hearing on remedies. Ho appeared without counsel and asked for a postponement because she realized that she needed counsel but her attorney was unavailable for the date. Additionally she explained that she had not wanted to read the legal notices and had just opened them days before the hearing. The ALJ denied the motion for a continuance, observing that Ho had only herself to blame for not opening the letters earlier and postponement would waste the time of assembled witnesses. Compensatory damages for mental distress and financial injury were awarded to Bracken for $49,284 and Lin for $25,345.
Ho claimed that that the agency violated the due process clause of the Fifth Amendment by not providing her with adequate notice of the proceedings and not postponing the hearing when she eventually opened the letters. However, the Constitution does not require that an effort to give notice succeed. See, e.g., Dusenbery v. United States, 534 U.S. 161 (2002). If it did, then people could evade knowledge, and avoid responsibility for their conduct, by burning notices on receipt—or just leaving them unopened, as Ho did.
Additionally Ho was ordered to pay the maximum civil penalty of $11,000 in additional compensatory damages. The ALJ concluded that the maximum penalty is appropriate because Ho not only set out to discriminate but also was truculent after being told of the conduct’s illegality. The ALJ deemed Ho’s decision to barricade the door against Bracken an egregious form of discrimination. Ho claimed that the penalty was egregious because they did not look at her finances, one of six factors the agency finds relevant. The agency was never given this information because a person who fails to supply information forfeits any complaint that the decisionmaker was uninformed on some issue.
Fung claimed that the ALJ had to prove a prima facie case of liability for discrimination. However Fung misunderstands how HUD handles defaults. A regulation provides that “failure to file an answer to the complaint shall be deemed an admission of all matters of fact recited therein. The ALJ concluded that the admitted facts do show liability. Fung apparently thinks that a prima facie case of liability depends on live testimony. Not at all; admissions are better evidence than testimony, because admissions are incontestable.
Fung additionally claims that he is entitled to discriminate by 42 U.S.C. §3603(b)(1). However that caption is an exemption which makes it an affirmative defense which must be timely asserted unusual in the answer and certainly at the trial. Fung did not answer or participate in the trial waiving this right. Addionally, Fung rented it to three unrelated persons; that’s not a single family by anyone’s definition. Then there is the fact that Ho acted as Fung’s agent, something that Fung admitted by failing to answer the complaint, which alleged that an agency relation existed.

The post Ho. v. HUD appeared first on Weiss Ortiz P.C. .

HUD AND FAIR HOUSING PARTNERS REPORT RECORD NUMBER OF HOUSING DISCRIMINATION COMPLAINTS

Mon, 22 Jun 2009 20:21:00 GMT

A record 10,552 fair housing discrimination complaints were filed in fiscal year 2008, according to a report just released by the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development. The report, which is produced for Congress each year, shows that a large portion of the complaints, 44 percent, were filed by persons with disabilities. Thirty-five percent, or 3,699, of the complaints alleged discrimination based on race. Click Here to read the full article

The post HUD AND FAIR HOUSING PARTNERS REPORT RECORD NUMBER OF HOUSING DISCRIMINATION COMPLAINTS appeared first on Weiss Ortiz P.C. .

Justice Department Files Lawsuit Alleging Racial Discrimination at Mobile Home Park in Gulfport, Mississippi

Mon, 22 Jun 2009 19:16:00 GMT

Justice Department Files Lawsuit Alleging Racial Discrimination at Mobile Home Park in Gulfport, Mississippi

The post Justice Department Files Lawsuit Alleging Racial Discrimination at Mobile Home Park in Gulfport, Mississippi appeared first on Weiss Ortiz P.C. .

Cuomo v. Clearing Hou

Fri, 08 May 2009 18:16:00 GMT

The post Cuomo v. Clearing Hou appeared first on Weiss Ortiz P.C. .

Fri, 08 May 2009 18:09:00 GMT

The post appeared first on Weiss Ortiz P.C. .

You-Tube: H.R. 1728 Hearing: Congressman Kanjorski on Anti-Predatory Lending Legislation on House Floor

Fri, 08 May 2009 17:25:00 GMT

http://www.youtube.com/CongressmanKanjorski

The post You-Tube: H.R. 1728 Hearing: Congressman Kanjorski on Anti-Predatory Lending Legislation on House Floor appeared first on Weiss Ortiz P.C. .

H.R. BILL 1728 Passes the House: Modification of the Lending Rules for Banks

Fri, 08 May 2009 17:18:00 GMT

http://www.responsiblelending.org/media-center/press-releases/archives/mortgage-reform-bill-passed-by-the-house.html

The post H.R. BILL 1728 Passes the House: Modification of the Lending Rules for Banks appeared first on Weiss Ortiz P.C. .

Architects and other design professionals can be sued for negligence

Fri, 03 Apr 2009 16:37:00 GMT

http://www.azcentral.com/business/abg/articles/2009/04/02/20090402abg-fischer0402.html

The post Architects and other design professionals can be sued for negligence appeared first on Weiss Ortiz P.C. .

Younger Doctrine and Federal Intervention into State Court Criminal Action

Tue, 31 Mar 2009 19:02:00 GMT

Safe Haven Sober Houses v. City of Boston , 517 F.Supp.2d 557 (D.Mass. 2007).
When Boston brought criminal proceedings against the owners and operators of homes for recovering alcoholics and drug users, those Defendants filed a preliminary injunction to stay the state criminal court proceedings. The Defendants argued that the court should analyze the motion under the traditional four-part test 1) likelihood of success on the merits 2) irreparable harm 3) balancing of the equities, and 4) the effect on the public interest of either the granting or denial of the injunction. The court analyzed the case under the Younger doctrine which prohibits a federal court from intervening in a state court criminal proceeding except under the following unusual circumstances: 1) “a statute that is ‘flagrantly and patently violative of express constitutional prohibitions in every clause, sentence and paragraph, and in whatever manner and against whomever an effort might be made to apply it’ (2) state prosecutions brought in bad faith without ‘any expectation of securing valid convictions’ or (3) when it ‘plainly appears’ that pursuing claims in pending state proceedings ‘would not afford adequate protections.'” Id . at 561-62 (quoting Younger v. Harris , 401 U.S. 37 (1971))

The court summarily dismissed the first prong of the analysis and spent more time on the second. Relying on Dombrowski “the seminal bad faith prosecution case identified in Younger ” the court recited the two-prong analysis for state prosecutions brought in bad faith: (1) “‘a prosecution has been brought without reasonable expectation of abtaining a valid conviction;’and (2) the defendants cannot adequately assert their claims because of an unavailable or biased state forum.” Safe Haven , F.Supp 2d at 562-63. Finding that the city was not harassing the housing providers as it was responding to the providers’ violations of zoning and building regulations. The court found this prong inapplicable as well.

Further, the court elaborated on the third prong, the adequacy of state protections, as applicable “(1) when a state forum is biased or (2) when a state forum cannot provide a remedy.” Id . at 566. The court found this prong inapplicable. The motion for the preliminary injunction was denied.

The post Younger Doctrine and Federal Intervention into State Court Criminal Action appeared first on Weiss Ortiz P.C. .

Tue, 31 Mar 2009 17:29:00 GMT

The post appeared first on Weiss Ortiz P.C. .

Housing Authority Attempts to Evict Mentally Disabled Man

Tue, 31 Mar 2009 17:07:00 GMT

Boston Housing Authority v. Bridgewaters , 2009 WL 26765 (Mass.)
Defendant was a mentally disabled man living with his brother in an apartment under the Boston Housing authority. He was not on his medication for manic depression and was transitioning between doctors when he assaulted his brother. The housing authority brought eviction proceedings. BHA got judgment for possession of the apartment. Court vacates and remands. Under 3604(f)(3)(B) discrimination includes “a refusal to make reasonable accommodations in rules, policies, practices, or services.” The court found that the Defendant made a request when he expressed a desire to continue his tenancy and that there were no “magic words” required in making this request. Further, the BHA had to accept that his disability caused the violence if they were unable to prove otherwise.

The post Housing Authority Attempts to Evict Mentally Disabled Man appeared first on Weiss Ortiz P.C. .

City Ordinance Prohibiting Children in SRO Unit Does Not Violate the FHA

Tue, 31 Mar 2009 16:41:00 GMT

Sierra v. City of New York , 579 F.Supp.2d 543 (N.D.N.Y, 2008)
Plaintiff, mother of two children, challenged the constitutionality of a NYC Housing Maintenance Code. She brought suit under 3604(a) claiming that the law which forbids children from living in SRO’s is facially discriminatory on the basis of family status. She sought to have the ordinance declared invalid and to enjoin its future enforcement. The court held that the city code did not violate the FHA because it furthered legitimate state interests in “health, safety and welfare of children that cannot be achieved through other alternatives” at 554. The court agreed that SROs are unsafe for children because occupants of several units share bathroom and kitchen facilities. The defendant offered “extensive evidence demonstrating concrete physical and psychological effects of SRO living on children, rather than merely generalizations and conclusory assertions.” at 551.

The post City Ordinance Prohibiting Children in SRO Unit Does Not Violate the FHA appeared first on Weiss Ortiz P.C. .

Subjective Fees Have Disparate Impact

Tue, 31 Mar 2009 15:08:00 GMT

Hoffman v. Option One Mortgage Corp. & H & R Block Mortgage Corp. , 589 F.Supp. 2d 1009 (N.D.Ill. 2008).
Plaintiff may assert a disparate impact claim on the basis of discretionary pricing. Under these financing practices, minority buyers are substantially more likely to be charged more in discretionary fees than are white buyers, even when controlling for risk-related factors. Defendants’ motion to dismiss denied.

The post Subjective Fees Have Disparate Impact appeared first on Weiss Ortiz P.C. .

St. Bernard Parish, Louisiana violated the Fair Housing Act (FHA)

Fri, 27 Mar 2009 20:29:00 GMT

http://www.pili-law.org/AlumniSpotlights.htm#lopez
The United States District Court for the Eastern District of Louisiana issued its ruling that St. Bernard Parish, Louisiana violated the Fair Housing Act (FHA) and a prior consent decree of the court in enacting a moratorium on apartment development in response to a developer proposing low income housing tax credit multifamily housing complexes in St. Bernard. The ruling points out that the moratorium was passed with the intent of, and had the effect of, discriminating against potential minority residents of St. Bernard, which is only 7.6 percent African-American as opposed to neighboring Orleans Parish, which is 67.3 percent African-American.
http://www.munsch.com/lists/lt.php?id=MB8GUFRTU1dEUAEHSggDUVZR

The post St. Bernard Parish, Louisiana violated the Fair Housing Act (FHA) appeared first on Weiss Ortiz P.C. .

Expiration of Housing Voucher Does Not Toll Limitations Period

Sun, 22 Mar 2009 14:01:00 GMT

In Ortega v. Housing Authority of the City of Brownsville , 572 F.Supp.2d 829, (S.D. Tex. 2008) the Plaintiff’s application for a housing voucher expired when he was unable to prove legal guardianship of his grandson. The Plaintiff alleged discrimination based on familial status in violation of 42 U.S.C. Sec. 3602(k). This section defines “familial status” as “one or more individuals…being domiciled with (1) a parent or another person having legal custody of such individual or individuals; or (2) the designee or such parent or other person having such custody, with the written permission of such parent or other person.

The court had to decide whether the two year limitations period began to run on July 19, 2004 when the housing voucher was issued by the agency or whether it began to run on December 21, 2004 when the agency issued a letter to inform the Plaintiff that the voucher had expired and his application was canceled. The Plaintiff filed suit in December of 2006.

The Plaintiff argues that because he was injured again in May of 2006 when he reapplied and no voucher was issued, the continuing violation doctrine tolled the limitations period. The court rejected this argument. In its analysis, the court relied on Huckabay v. Moore , 142 F.3d 233, 238-39 (5th Cir. 1998) where that court “reasoned the continued violations doctrine was useful where individual acts or events may not be evident of discrimination except in cumulation over time.” It also relied on Berry v. Bd. of Supervisors of L.S.U. , 715 F.2d 971, 981 (5th cir. 1983) where that court laid out three reqirements for continuing violations: 1) similar subject matter; 2) frequent violations; and 3) a minor degree of permanence.

The third requirement was most persuasive here as the Ortega court held that the violation of the voucher in 2004 “was sufficiently permanent to create a cause of action and put a reasonable person on notice that he could act to protect his rights.”

The post Expiration of Housing Voucher Does Not Toll Limitations Period appeared first on Weiss Ortiz P.C. .

Mortgage Brokers and Discretionary Pricing

Fri, 20 Mar 2009 12:59:00 GMT

In Taylor v. Accredited Home Lenders , 580 F.Supp.2d 1062 (S.D. Cal. 2008) the Plaintiffs alleged a facially neutral “discretionary pricing policy” had a disparate impact on African American borrowers. At issue was whether the injury suffered was the result of a single incident violation which would have placed the Plaintiff’s complaint beyond the two year statute of limitations or whether the injury was the result of a continuing violation.

42 U.S.C. Sec.3613(1)A) requires that actions must be commenced “no later than 2 years after the occurrence or the termination of an alleged discriminatory housing practice.” The court agreed with the Plaintiffs and held that the issuance of each mortgage statement containing the inflated amount due constituted a new violation and that each payment of that inflated figure was a new violation. The court rejected the defendant’s single incident theory that “the violation occurred and terminated when the loan closed.” Id. at 1065.

The court relies on Havens Realty Corp. v. Coleman , 455 U.S.363(1982) and its explanation of the continuing violation doctrine.

The post Mortgage Brokers and Discretionary Pricing appeared first on Weiss Ortiz P.C. .

Stimulus Plan Brings Needed Relief To Latino Families

Wed, 11 Mar 2009 21:33:00 GMT

http://www.nclr.org/content/news/detail/55892/

The post Stimulus Plan Brings Needed Relief To Latino Families appeared first on Weiss Ortiz P.C. .

Stimulus Plan & Relief

Wed, 11 Mar 2009 21:15:00 GMT

Do you think that the stimulus package will alleviate the foreclosure crisis? If yes, how?

The post Stimulus Plan & Relief appeared first on Weiss Ortiz P.C. .

ADA Amendment

Fri, 30 Jan 2009 23:38:00 GMT

The post ADA Amendment appeared first on Weiss Ortiz P.C. .