The Illinois Department of Labor assessed a penalty against a roofing company for $1.6 million with no prior notice or opportunity to be heard. The fine was assessed under a statute that made it unlawful for construction contractors in Illinois to hire independent contractors. The company’s independent contractors joined the lawsuit. The appellate court reversed the denial of a temporary restraining order, allowing Jana’s client to continue in business while litigation ensued. While the case was on appeal to the Illinois Supreme Court from final judgment in favor of the State, the Illinois legislature amended the statute to cure the facial constitutional defects. The Illinois Supreme Court decision construed the new law so that Jana’s clients were not liable for penalties.

Jana prevented a city from demolishing a vandalized commercial building. The property was located where an interchange was planned which would significantly increase the value of the property. The city sought to have its contractor do the work and charge Jana’s client an inflated fee, which could have forced the client into bankruptcy. Because of Jana’s intervention, her client was free to remedy his property damage with his own resources and retain the property for later development.

Jana appealed to the Seventh Circuit the federal denial of a motion to dismiss to allow State court construction of its previously-entered order which arguably would have governed the issue before the federal tribunal. The dispute involved an asset freeze pending enforcement of a multi-million dollar judgment. Jana raised defenses that questioned her client’s liability. The defendants dismissed their case while the appeal was pending.

Jana’s client owned several commercial property locations, which were leased to a franchise. He purchased one of the properties from a seller who failed to disclose needed repairs that caused the lease to be in default. Even though Illinois law does not generally recognize failure to disclose in commercial real estate settings, Jana sued under an exception that alleged the seller was liable for breach of contract and violation of the Illinois Consumer Fraud Act. She also sued several related entities under an enterprise theory. On appeal from dismissal, the court validated the enterprise theory and remanded with instructions.

An age discrimination client was given a promotion as a result of Jana’s efforts in mediation, which included not only the Age Discrimination in Employment (ADEA) claim but also a constitutional challenge to a statute. This is just another one of the successful cases with Yocom Rine Law.

Jana sued a State agency on behalf of a client who markets equipment to municipalities. The suit arose out of alleged bid-rigging on a government contract. The project was federally funded, but administered by the State. While the case was on appeal to a federal court of appeals from dismissal of the Complaint, the State agency published a revised State Contracts Manual that prospectively remedied the problem.

Jana represented a county sheriff in a lawsuit against county government alleging noncompliance with a statute requiring the sheriff to administer funds earned from the jail commissary for the religious and educational benefit of prisoners. As a result of the litigation, the funds were returned to the sheriff’s control. He used the funds to retain the deputy chaplain’s employment. In a related case, litigation was placed on hold at the client’s request and was ultimately voluntarily dismissed.

Jana defended a business in a lawsuit brought by an investor. The investor claimed ownership of half of the client’s business based upon a small investment of vague definition, which had been more than repaid. The business also had evolved since the investment was made, so the claim for ownership was unreasonable. Nevertheless, the litigation proceeded for many years prior to Jana’s involvement. Jana reviewed the voluminous file, rewrote the pleadings and reviewed discovery compliance. The litigation stalled and eventually settled in the client’s favor. This is just another one of the successful cases with Yocom Rine Law.