Use this button to switch between dark and light mode.

Experience a New Era in Legal Research with Free Access to Lexis+

Tri-G, Inc. v. Burke, Bosselman & Weaver

Tri-G, Inc. v. Burke, Bosselman & Weaver

Supreme Court of Illinois

June 22, 2006, Opinion Filed

Docket Nos. 99584, 99595 cons.

Opinion

 [*224]   [**394]   [****589]  Tri-G, Inc. (Tri-G), brought a legal malpractice action in the circuit court of McHenry County against the law firm of Burke, Bosselman & Weaver (Burke) to recover damages it sustained as a result of Burke's failure to  [*225]  prosecute a complaint Tri-G had previously filed against Elgin Federal Bank (Elgin Federal). Following a trial on the merits, a jury found that Burke had been negligent in handling Tri-G's case against Elgin Federal and that but for that negligence, Tri-G would have recovered $ 1,168,775 in compensatory damages and an equal sum in punitive damages from Elgin Federal. Accordingly, the jury returned a verdict in favor of Tri-G and against Burke for $ 2,337,550.

After the circuit court entered judgment on the jury's verdict, Burke appealed. Tri-G cross-appealed. The appellate court affirmed [***2]  the judgment in part, reversed in part, and remanded the cause to the trial court for further proceedings. 353 Ill. App. 3d 197, 817 N.E.2d 1230, 288 Ill. Dec. 580. In so ruling, the appellate court expressly rejected Burke's arguments that the award of punitive to Tri-G was either improper as a matter of law or excessive in light of the evidence adduced at trial. It held that Illinois law permits a legal malpractice plaintiff to receive an award of lost punitive damages from a defendant attorney and concluded that the punitive damages award made in this case was justified by the evidence. 353 Ill. App. 3d at 232.

Burke and Tri-G each filed petitions for leave to appeal. 177 Ill. 2d R. 315(a). We allowed their respective petitions and consolidated the appeals for review. The primary issue before us is whether the appellate erred in upholding the award of lost punitive damages to Tri-G. For the reasons that follow, we hold that it did. The judgment of the appellate court is therefore affirmed in part and reversed in part.

Read The Full CaseNot a Lexis Advance subscriber? Try it out for free.

Full case includes Shepard's, Headnotes, Legal Analytics from Lex Machina, and more.

222 Ill. 2d 218 *; 856 N.E.2d 389 **; 2006 Ill. LEXIS 1090 ***; 305 Ill. Dec. 584 ****

TRI-G, INC., et al., Appellees, v. BURKE, BOSSELMAN & WEAVER et al., Appellants.

Subsequent History:  [***1]  As Amended June 23, 2006.

Rehearing denied by Tri-G, Inc. v. Burke, Bosselman & Weaver, 2006 Ill. LEXIS 1624 (Ill., Sept. 25, 2006)

Prior History: Appeal from the Appellate Court for the Second District.

Tri-G, Inc. v. Burke, Bosselman & Weaver, 353 Ill. App. 3d 197, 817 N.E.2d 1230, 2004 Ill. App. LEXIS 1289, 288 Ill. Dec. 580 (Ill. App. Ct. 2d Dist., 2004)

CORE TERMS

punitive damages, damages, legal malpractice action, compensatory damages, appellate court, payouts, underlying case, construction loan, trial court, lost profits, loans, recovered, remittitur, legal malpractice, partially, courts, cases, funds, terms, malpractice, punitive, recoverable, compensate, misconduct, underlying action, slip opinion, jury award, compensatory, contends, punish

Evidence, Burdens of Proof, Ultimate Burden of Persuasion, Torts, Malpractice & Professional Liability, Attorneys, Types of Damages, Compensatory Damages, General Overview, Civil Procedure, Appeals, Notice of Appeal, Reviewability of Lower Court Decisions, Preservation for Review, Constitutional Law, Fundamental Rights, Procedural Due Process, Scope of Protection, Pleading & Practice, Motion Practice, Standards of Review, Abuse of Discretion, Questions of Fact & Law, Remedies, Damages, Compensatory Damages, Monetary Damages, Jury Trials, Verdicts, Jury Instructions, Trials, Province of Court & Jury, Relief From Judgments, Additur & Remittitur, Remittiturs, Governments, Courts, Rule Application & Interpretation, Judgment Interest, Prejudgment Interest, Legislation, Interpretation, Preliminary Considerations, Equity, Authority to Adjudicate, Record on Appeal, Punitive Damages