Page 2 - John Hundley 2012
P. 2

Supreme Court’s Ellis Decision Is Restrictively Interpreted


             In re Estate of Ellis, 236 Ill.2d 45 (2009), seeming to hold that suits claiming a defendant wrongfully
        interfered  with  an  inheritance  are  not  bound  by  Illinois’  six-month  deadline  for  filing  will  contests  (see
        Sharp Thinking No. 26 (November 2009), has been restrictively interpreted by a panel of the Appellate
        Court.  In Bjork v. O’Meara, 2012 IL App (1st) 111617 (Jan. 11, 2012), the First District interpreted Ellis as
        applying only where the will-contest remedy was not “available” to the objector because of ignorance of
        the expectancy under a prior will.  Though the appellate panel was unanimous, look for the plaintiff to ask
        the Supreme Court to review its decision.

        Appeal Leave Granted in Center Partners Case


             The Illinois Supreme Court has granted leave to appeal in Center Partners, Ltd. v. Growth Head GP,
        LLC,  2011 IL App (1st) 110381 (Aug. 30, 2011).  As  discussed in  Sharp Thinking No. 52 (September
        2011),  the  Appellate  Court  decision  held  that  business  transaction  lawyers  have  no  “work  product”
        privilege  analogous  to  their  litigator  counterparts,  and  it  liberally  found  waiver  of  the  attorney-client
        privilege through information-sharing among parties that seemed to have a common interest.

        Judgment Entered Against Victim Lawyer in Internet Scam Case


             The lawyer who found himself unable to implead the purported issuer of a counterfeit cashier’s check
        has had judgment entered against him on the claim made by the bank where his lawyer’s trust account
        was located and into which he deposited the bogus check received in an internet-related scam (see Fifth
        Third Bank v. Hirsch, 2011 WL 2470643 (N.D. Ill. 2011); Sharp Thinking No. 54 (November 2011)).  In
        Fifth Third Bank v. Hirsch, 2011 WL 5403600 (N.D. Ill. 2011), the court held the lawyer liable to his bank
        for the $269,500 loss on the counterfeit check, plus attorneys’ fees and costs imposed under bank rules
        incorporated into the account agreement.

        Amendment Appears to Clarify Certain Citation Lien Questions

             In Sharp Thinking No. 13 (October 2008), we noted a series of looming questions as to the lien effect
        on personal property of citations to discover assets served under 735 ILCS 5/2-1402.  Effective January 1,
        2012, the legislature has amended that statute in ways that appear to answer some of those questions.

             In P.A. 97-0350, the legislature inserts into § 2-1402 a subsection (k-10) which provides that when a
        creditor discovers personal property subject to the lien of a citation, it may have the court impress a lien
        against a specific item of personal property, which lien shall survive termination of the citation proceeding.
        That language seems necessarily to imply that if the creditor does not have such a lien impressed, the lien
        expires with the termination of the supplementary proceeding (which event may itself be ambiguous – see
        No. 13).  As new § 2-1402(k-10) applies only “[i]f a creditor discovers personal property” in the citation
        proceeding, it would appear to leave open the lien effect on property which is not disclosed in response to
        the citation.  Accordingly, creditors may wish to wear both belts and suspenders – and have the lien on
        personal property perfected under 735 ILCS 5/12-111 as well as proceeding under § 2-1402.

                                                                     -- John T. Hundley, 618-242-0246, Jhundley@lotsharp.com

                                                                                                      John\Sharp Thinking\#56.doc.
        ●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●●
                                           THE  SHARP  LAW  FIRM,  P.C.

                1115 Harrison, P.O. Box 906, Mt. Vernon, IL 62864 • Telephone 618-242-0246 • Facsimile 618-242-1170 • www.thesharpfirm.com

           Business Transactions • Litigation • Financial Law • Problem Finances • Real Estate • Corporate • Commercial Disputes • Creditors’ Rights •
                                Arbitration • Administrative Law • Employment Matters • Estate Planning • Probate

             Terry Sharp: Tsharp@lotsharp.com; John T. Hundley: Jhundley@lotsharp.com; Bentley J. Bender: Bbender@lotsharp.com

                                                        Advertising Material
   1   2   3   4   5   6   7