Park district not liable for July 4 injury

Trial Notebook

By Steven P. Garmisa

Hoey & Farina

Posted December 5, 2016 1:42 PM

The Chicago Park District claimed absolute immunity under the Local Governmental and Governmental Employees Tort Immunity Act when Kristina Perez tried to hold the district liable for the severe injuries she suffered — including the amputation of her right foot — because of a fireworks mishap during a pyrotechnics display that Thomas Lagowski and Krzysztoff Gros allegedly put on without a permit in West Lawn Park on July 4, 2013.There was no exception for willful and wanton misconduct in the portions of the …

To Read the Full Story

Your source for legal news and information

Print & Digital Access

Stay in the know all year long with these benefits:

Delivery to your office in downtown Chicago or mailed outside our hand-delivery zone.
Unlimited access to chicagolawbulletin.com.
Access to our e-edition and mobile site.
Breaking news alerts, Morning Lineup and Afternoon Headlines.
Exclusive access to events, discounts and more.

Order now, or call 312-644-2394 or email Subscription@LawBulletinMedia.com for details.

Be in the know. These must-read insider briefings will keep you

informed of the latest legal developments in Chicago. Sign up today!

Judge ponders prudential mootness in case over permits

A federal judge in the District of Columbia looked to a 1990 opinion from the 7th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals for guidance when considering whether to dismiss several claims against the State of Florida under the “melange of doctrines” referred to as “prudential mootness.”
By Steven P. Garmisa
Book details how Puerto Ricans established foothold in Chicago

La Casa Cultural Latina at the University of Illinois at Urbana Champaign marked its 50th anniversary with a celebration last month.
By Justice Ramon Ocasio III
Prosecutor suspended for inappropriate comments

Accused of violating an Iowa rule that says it is professional misconduct for an attorney to “engage in sexual harassment or other unlawful discrimination in the practice of law,” the top prosecutor in Wapello County argued that comments he allegedly made to his staff about defendants, judges and his predecessor were protected by his First Amendment right to free speech.
By Steven P. Garmisa
Court assesses facts necessary to decide insurer duty to defend

The 1st District Appellate Court recently addressed the limits of “extraneous” facts to be taken into account in deciding whether a complaint against an insured gives rise to a duty to defend.
By Don R. Sampen
Trial-setting preference law deserves to be protected

Imagine you are terminally ill with blood cancer acquired from chemical exposure at work, wondering how to assure your teenage children that they will be OK without you. Or you and your husband of 55 years were rear-ended on the expressway and your husband died in your arms. You are now an 80-year-old widow suffering from the trauma of that accident. Or you’re an active retiree who fractured a hip when the casino bus prematurely closed its door on you. You’re healing, but you’re 96 years old and realistic. None of these people have much time left.
By Kathy Byrne
High court considers split on arbitration mootness

Relying on cases that included a federal decision from Illinois, the respondent in proceedings to confirm an $11.4 million arbitration award asked the Washington Supreme Court to decide the litigation was moot because it fully paid the petitioner before a judgment was entered. But the high court, surveying dueling decisions from across the country, disagreed.
By Steven P. Garmisa
CBA to mark sesquicentennial with gala, inaugural award

The Chicago Bar Association turns 150 years old May 27 and continues to be a vibrant, relevant association of lawyers. Come out this Friday to help celebrate.
By Daniel A. Cotter
Courts split on correct venue for subpoena battle

When a non-party located in New Hampshire challenged a subpoena duces tecum that called for production of documents in Las Vegas, the first hurdle was a venue question that has “befuddled attorneys and split courts.”
By Steven P. Garmisa