Typically, a plaintiff chooses the most convenient place for their lawsuit and the Defendant, unless that location happens to be where they also wish, fight this choice.  Under the principle of "forum non conveniens", defendants are often successful in relocating the litigation to their home turf.  This is mainly based on the fact that the Defendant should receive whatever local benefit and efficiency because they are the ones on the hook.  In federal litigation, with diversity jurisdiction especially, early federal law sought to curb local favoritism.  In the same way, state jurisprudence has evolved to encompass a framework for evaluating where a lawsuit should be conducted.  Choice of forum is very different from choice of law, which is what law to apply. 

Here, in Taylor v. Lemans Corporation, the First Appellate District affirmed a Cook County Circuit Court decision denying Lemans' Motion to Transfer on grounds of forum non conveniens.  The facts are essential to determining the proper forum for a lawsuit.  Here, this litigation originated from a motocross accident which occurred in Bureau County, Illinois.  The plaintiff sued for product liability and chose cook county as his forum even though he did not live there.  Despite that, the Defendant's motion was denied because, as the Appellate Court reasoned, the Plaintiff's choice should be given some deference and Cook County is not inappropriately chosen despite its large caseload and distance from the accident.  Witness testimony can be obtained through depositions and computer and internet access have made the physical location of accidents less significant.

So, the intersection of technology and the law seems to shaping civil procedure and how Courts perceive the relative positions of the litigants and their ability to obtain, review, and process information. The ruling, and its supporting reasoning, indicates that Defendants need to be sharper with their forum non conveniens arguments and that they should make plans to litigate more cases in Cook County rather than collar counties (or rural western and downstate counties) because plaintiffs will undoubtedly seek to sue in Cook County because jury verdicts are viewed as more favorable to plaintiffs there than in other counties in Illinois.  

Contacting a business litigation attorney prior to litigation can help shape contracts or other materials to specify a particular favorable forum in advance of issues.  Further, once litigation is commenced, business litigation attorneys can help craft stronger, more developed arguments in favor of forum non conveniens to ensure that litigation plays out in more favorable fora to both minimize damages if there is to be an adverse ruling and to provide for better leverage in settlement negotiations after plaintiff's counsel is faced with many long commutes to litigate the case.

The MineolaAmerican reports that a local wholesale car dealership which does business with Carmax, a large consumer-oriented car reseller and purchaser, has sued the massive dealer for anti-trust violations stemming from their refusal to allow dealers to supply car history reports from any information company rather than Carmax's preferred vendor(s).

JC Penney, Macy's, and Martha Stewart are embroiled in a large commercial breach of contract case revolving around JC Penney's capture of Martha Stewart and her Martha Stewart collection housewares.  The Chicago Tribune explains that Martha Stewart signed a contract with Macy's which obligated her to create and market a line of products in Macy's.  Macy's got Stewart, who should be very used to court proceedings, to admit in depositions that the contract also was an exclusivity contract as well as a contract for her name, fame, expertise, and line of products.

This case illustrates precisely why depositions are critical to trial and provide a clear roadmap for trial strategy for both sides.

The Chicago Tribune reports that Kraft Foods, Inc. has sued casual dining chain Cracker Barrel Old Country Store Inc. and its potential retail distributor the John Morrell Food Group to enjoin and nullify their contractual attempt to licensed the trademark "Cracker Barrel" to the distributor for retail distribution.  Kraft trademarked "Cracker Barrel" in 1954 and sees Cracker Barrel Old Country Store's attempts to expand the use of their mark from their restaurant chains to retail grocers as infringing their mark.

ESPN, of all sources, is reporting about an irate attorney who purchased a ticket to see the San Antonio Spurs play against the Miami Heat in Miami is suing the Spurs under Texas' Deceptive Trade Practices Act.  The attorney purchased a ticket for himself and his son.  Shortly before the game, the coach of the Spurs, Greg Popovich, sent their best players back to San Antonio to rest rather than play their fourth game in five nights.  The attorney is suing because he feels he was deceived into purchasing tickets and paying a premium for two teams loaded with star players.  Instead, he watched the B and C squad Spurs take the Heat to the brink in a 100-105 loss.

Stepping in the shoes of their injured insured, Great Northern Insurance Co. filed suit against Cellar Advisors, a wine moving company hired to move a portion of a wealthy family's wine collection from Illinois to Florida in climate controlled containers.  The Chicago Tribune notes that:

No loving parent can stand by without acting when their child is harmed.  No parent should have to tolerate that.  When parents hire caregivers for their children, parents, or themselves, that caregiver is entrusted with a near sacred duty to preserve the health, dignity, and vitality of a loved one.  When that duty is breached, the harm can be tremendous in both physical pain, but also emotional turmoil.

Business owners need to understand how the law can protect them against competitors and insulate them from customer lawsuits.  To reinforce this lesson, consider Beef Products, Inc., a closely held South Dakota company that faced severe consequences from negative reports regarding their processed beef product.  When businesses are losing money stemming from interference with existing or future business relationships, business should contact a business attorney who can look at all of their options to remedy this threat and mitigate harm, including through litigation.

The Wall Street Journal, among others, is reporting that Beef Products Inc., , has sued ABC for defamation, tortious interference with contract (business relationship), and a state anti-food disparagement statute, among other claims.  The beef company also named Diana Sawyer, who reported on the story for ABC and microbiologist Gerald Zirnstein, who as a USDA food inspector investigating a food bacteria outbreak in 2002 toured a BPI plant and coined the term "pink slime" to describe their product.  BPI is suing these defendants for $1.20 billion, representing lost profits stemming from the alleged defamatory reporting and characterization of their product.

The Chicago Teachers Union is striking in Chicago right now.  The teacher's union hurdled the many procedural requirements to legally strike for wages, but recent changes to the Illinois Educational Labor Relations Act, 115 ILCS 5/1 (IELRA) may have made the strike illegal as wage demands have been met.  Below is an unofficial napkin analysis of the legal issues at play.  Since some provisions have only been effective for a bit over a year, there is no real precedent on this issue and this napkin analysis reviews the plain statutory law that governs this strike.

The Chicago Tribune has reported an amusing, but common, story of neighbors who use their respective property in incompatible ways that create conflict.  According to a lawsuit filed, likely based on nuisance, breach of contract, and violations of the Condominium Property Act, 765 ILCS 605/1 et seq., a set of owners that had a condo in the building before the new owner ("Cat Lady"), have allergies to cats.  Cat Lady has allegedly accumulated 20 cats in her single bedroom condo.  The smell from the urine and feces has wafted, through shared ventilation, into the neighboring condos.  The affected condo owners have sent letters notifying both the Cat Lady and the association (and its Board) of the issue.  Even with notice, all parties failed to cure the issue and the offended parties sued.