Real Estate Law - In Emigrant Mortgage vs. Capital Chicago Financial Services, there was a contract between a mortgage company and a broker whereby the broker agreed not to solicit borrowers which it procured for the mortgage company for any other lender and the Court determined that said contract was valid under New York law, despite there being no time limit.  Furthermore, there was a clause allowing the lender to determine an unacceptable rate of prepayments and to collect back from the broker commissions paid and the Court indicated this was not unconsciousable, especially since the mortgage company did not act in an arbitrary or capricious manner.

Family Law- In the case of In Re Marriage of Calvin D. Duggan, the Court determined that an Order modifying the former husband's child support while a Petition to Modify Visitation was still pending was not appealable as a matter of right but required a statutory finding in order to be appealable.  Furthermore, the Trial Court erred when it entered a child support order as a percentage of income instead of a dollar amount as required by Section 505 of IMDMA. 

Business Law - In Lohr vs. Havens, there was an action by a minority shareholder of a closely held corporation for non-public shareholder relief, including the purchase of all outstanding shares.  However, the majority owner failed to send proper notice to all of the other shareholders.  Therefore, the Court was not required to consider the equities before allowing Plaintiff to voluntarily dismiss that count of the complaint asking for the purchase of his shares.

Family Law - In the case of In Re Marriage of Ford, there was a determination that the Trial Court's award of child support based on money that the husband ran through his business when the father failed to present detailed business records and when his financial affidavit was flawed by his own omission, was not against the manifest weight of the evidence.  However, the trial court failed to give adequate value to the marital estate from the use of Defendant's non-marital home as a residence during the marriage when it ordered reimbursement by the marital estate.  The value of the use offsets the contribution toward the non-marital estate by payment of the mortgage.  Furthermore, although reimbursement can be ordered for interest on the non-marital rental property mortgage paid for by marital funds, there was a determination that the Trial Court's calculation was excessive. 

Business Law - In Lifetech vs. Edwards, there was a determination that the Trial Court did not abuse its discretion when it granted Plaintiff, a former employer, a preliminary injunction enforcing restrictive covenants contained in the employment agreement, and when it found that Plaintiff had a legitimate business interest and confidential information regarding its customers, pricing and open bids.

Business Law - The Appellate Court, in Bess v. DirecTV, Inc., determined that the trial court correctly refused to stay litigation of the consumer fraud complaint filed by a subscriber to a satellite cable service pending arbitration, because an arbitration clause was procedurally unconscionable.  The Court determined that the contract was one of adhesion, which the consumer did not see until they already invested in equipment and ordered service and that the arbitration clause was inconspicuously placed and the agreement further provided that the customer, who cancels service in order to avoid its terms, incurs a cancellation fee.

Family Law - In Crank v. Crank, the Appellate Court found that the Income Withholding for Support Act did not limit the amount that can be withheld from an obligor's wages, for payment of support and maintenance arrearage after emancipation of children to the amount that had been withheld for current support before emancipation.

Real Estate Law - In the case of Fox v. Heimann, the Appellate Court determined that the requirement in the Residential Real Estate Disclosure Act to notify a buyer of material defects in the property being sold is implied in contract and forms the basis for a viable cause of action for breach of contract.  There was evidence that the previous owner informed the sellers of material defects in the foundation, coupled with expert testimony from plaintiffs' expert, in support of the trial court's finding in favor of plaintiff for breach of contract.

Business Law - In Pantoja-Cahue v. Ford Motor Credit Co., the Appellate Court determined that the trial court erred in granting the Motion to Dismiss part of plaintiff's complaint against Ford and the repossession firm it hired to repossessed a leased vehicle, alleging violation of the Commercial Code, because breaking into a locked garage and retrieving a vehicle may constitute a breach of the peace. 

Real Estate Law - In Affordable Housing Preservation Foundation v. Smith Wiiams, the Appellate Court determined that because Colorado law governing not-for-profit corporations allowed dissolved corporations to file suit to collect assets, that Plaintiff had standing to seek an injunction against Defendants from asserting ownership of Illinois real estate titled in its name.