Illinois Attorneys Could Be Liable for Punitive Damages in Malpractice Claims

A recent Illinois Supreme Court ruling could reshape legal malpractice claims by allowing punitive damages from underlying cases to be recovered as compensatory damages if causation is proven. This shift holds attorneys accountable for negligence and increases the stakes for legal practitioners. Learn how this decision affects the legal community and its implications for navigating malpractice claims.

Missouri Legislature Turns Eyes to Punitive Damages

Missouri lawmakers are targeting punitive damages with proposed legislation that would significantly restrict such claims. Senate Bill 591 and its counterpart, House Bill 1553, would heighten the burden of proof, require court approval before punitive damages may be pled, limit employer liability to authorized or ratified conduct by senior leadership, and mandate fee shifting when punitive damages claims fail. The bills reflect a broader effort by tort reform advocates to curb large punitive awards and are currently pending in the Missouri legislature.

Punitive Damages Demand Alone Likely Insufficient to Trigger Independent Counsel

In Illinois, the question of when an insured is entitled to independent counsel can be complex, especially in cases involving punitive damages. While some precedents suggest a conflict of interest arises, a recent ruling in Bean Products, Inc. v. Scottsdale Insurance Co. challenges this notion. The court clarified that a mere demand for punitive damages does not automatically create a conflict warranting independent counsel. Instead, it emphasized the importance of evaluating each case’s unique circumstances. Discover how these legal nuances could impact your rights and defenses in insurance claims.