Changes to the Illinois laws which govern businesses and employees are made in places many people do not look: appellate opinions, federal dockets, bills that quietly die in committee, or agencies that revise or reverse prior regulations. These are short notes on the ones worth knowing about. Each post leads with what changed, says what it means for Illinois businesses or employees, and links the source so you can read it yourself.
A competitor created a shell company, passed it off as an insurance agency, and used it to license software it could not otherwise reach. Most of the case survived dismissal.
Read the noteOne requires you to take cash. The other requires you to keep paying employees while they sit on a jury. Neither is in effect yet, and they arrive a year apart.
Read the noteTwo minority owners personally guaranteed their company's loans. The company defaulted. Because the bank could not show it sold the assets in a commercially reasonable way, neither guarantor paid anything.
Read the noteThe operating agreement only sent disputes arising under its own terms to arbitration. A member's claims under the LLC Act went to the arbitrator anyway.
Read the noteAn investment adviser warned a prospective client away from a rival using what he found on Google and BrokerCheck. A jury awarded $27.5 million in punitive damages. The trial court cut it, and the appellate court kept the cut.
Read the noteA physician was falsely accused of sexual assault in a Facebook post seen by thousands. He won, and was awarded $1. The appellate court sent it back.
Read the noteThe headline law regulates companies with half a billion dollars in revenue. The AI rule that actually reaches ordinary Illinois employers took effect quietly in January.
Read the noteA father left everything to a woman outside the family and explicitly cut out his only child. The son challenged capacity, undue influence, and financial exploitation, and lost on all three.
Read the noteA creditor traced his debtor's money into family trusts and out to Ghana. The trial court said Illinois had no jurisdiction over the people holding it. The appellate court disagreed.
Read the noteEleven family trusts hold the limited partnership behind a group of Chicago-area car dealerships. Two branches sued to expel the general partner, lost on every claim, and were ordered to fund the contribution they had refused.
Read the noteOwners alleged that funds they had paid in were spent for someone else's benefit. They sued in their own names and lost on standing before anyone examined whether it happened.
Read the noteOne bill would have banned non-competes outright. Another would have limited them to people earning over $300,000. Neither moved, and the federal rule is gone too.
Read the noteAn employer sued over a covenant it believed was governed by the Freedom to Work Act. A licensing statute it had not focused on decided the case instead.
Read the noteIllinois capped biometric privacy damages at one recovery per person in 2024. The Seventh Circuit has now held that cap applies to lawsuits that were already pending.
Read the noteThe shareholders' agreement said the accountants' valuation would be binding and conclusive. The company treated that as permission to decide what the accountants would be working with.
Read the noteTwo owners held half a youth baseball business, one owner held the other half, and the one with the other half took over the books. The dissolution and the punitive damages were both affirmed.
Read the noteCalifornia is famous for refusing to enforce non-competes. A former franchisee argued that killed the covenant in its franchise agreement. The court held that California rule is about employees, not businesses.
Read the note