Litchfield Cavo Successfully Defends Appeal Regarding the Savings Clause
Chicago Partner Thomas Crawford and Associate Timothy Dorr successfully defended an appeal in the Second Appellate District regarding the application of the Savings Clause (735 ILCS 5/13-207). Appellant sought a reversal of the circuit court ruling, in which the court held that the savings clause did not apply to an action filed by plaintiff alleging professional negligence, which was otherwise barred by the statute of limitations.
Appellee had initiated a breach of contract action for attorneys’ fees and expenses arising from its representation of Appellee in a legal matter. More than six months after seeking leave to file a counterclaim and one week before trial, Appellee filed a motion for reconsideration of its motion for leave to file a counterclaim and emergency motion to stay the trial. The motion was denied. Instead of appealing the ruling, Appellee initiated a new action alleging professional negligence. In affirming the trial court ruling, the Second District Court held that the Trial Court properly granted Appellee’s Motion to Dismiss pursuant to 2-615(a) and 2-619(a)(5) of the Illinois Code of Civil Procedure. The court held that the action was barred by the statute of limitations and that the Savings Clause did not apply because the claim was not filed in the same action as a counterclaim or a setoff. The case can be viewed by clicking on the following link: Rockford Structures Constr. Co. v. Shriver, O’Neill and Thompson, et al., 2016 IL. App. (2nd) 160151-U (Sept. 30, 2016).
In February 2017, the Illinois Supreme Court denied Appellant’s Petition for further appeal.