Illinois courts should be for Illinois cases, not a tourism attraction

When people in other states think of Illinois, many things come to mind to epitomize some aspect of the state; for example, some people conjure up images of Abraham Lincoln, while others think of the World Champion Chicago White Sox, or one of our other well-known sports franchises.

Unfortunately however, as the recently released American Tort Reform Association annual “judicial hellhole” survey confirmed, many business people think of lawsuits. Illinois contains three of the ATRA’s six hellhole jurisdictions. The most egregious abuse of the Illinois legal system–which has led to this dubious distinction–occurs when plaintiffs, often from out of state, shop for friendly courts to hear sometimes frivolous claims.

Fortunately, the time is ripe for a common sense solution that would go a long way toward resolving this problem in Illinois. The American Insurance Association, along with the Illinois Civil Justice League, local and state chambers and numerous Illinois companies, are advocating passage of Senate Bill 1724, a venue reform bill that would keep Illinois courts open for Illinois cases, but shut down abusive forum shopping.

Setting the stage
Legislative solutions labeled “tort reform” traditionally have not been very successful in Illinois; however, the November 2004 election of Supreme Court Justice Lloyd Karmeier, a Republican from the district that includes the infamous Madison County, was a real catalyst for change, both legislatively and in the court system.

That critical election was followed by enactment last spring of medical malpractice reforms, including caps on non-economic damages. Also, the fall of 2005 saw several key Supreme Court decisions (such as Gridley v. State Farm) which sent a clear message that it is no longer business as usual in Illinois courts. In the Gridley case, the Court reversed a Madison County decision involving a plaintiff from Louisiana making a claim against State Farm regarding a purchase he made in Louisiana, and involving witnesses and evidence located almost entirely in Louisiana.

Building a case for reform
SB 1724 is a simple proposal designed to eliminate cases like Gridley and that of Berry v. Electrolux Home Products Inc. In Berry, a Michigan resident that had an accident with a lawn tractor manufactured in South Carolina by a company based in Ohio filed her lawsuit in Cook County, Ill. SB 1724 says that a lawsuit: a) must be filed in a county with a true, real connection to the injury or wrongdoing that occurred; or b) whomever is being sued must live or be located in the county where the lawsuit is filed; or, c) when there is more than one defendant, a majority of defendants must be from the same jurisdiction where the lawsuit is filed.

The bill, originally introduced last spring but held over for this session, was the subject of an information-only hearing by the Senate Judiciary Committee in Chicago this past November. Among the issues discussed was the Gridley decision–which validates the bill’s intent–and the findings of an ICJL study that statistically proved the imbalance of lawsuits being filed in a few select jurisdictions, like the judicial hellholes, when compared to other parts of the states.

The strongest argument against this common sense proposal is strange but true: opponents claim lawsuits are a good source of tourism. Their thinking is that the state would lose valuable tourism dollars from plaintiffs who come to the state to have their cases heard. Can’t you see this ad campaign: “Come to Illinois–tour the Lincoln Museum, see the view from the Sears Tower, and file your lawsuit?”

Clearly, SB 1724 is a proposal whose time has come. According to a poll of more than 800 Illinois voters from across the state taken early last year, fully eight in 10 Illinois voters see a need to reform the civil court system in Illinois along the lines of SB 1724.

Moving forward
The stage is set for the Illinois General Assembly to pass a clear, common sense solution to the venue shopping that has caused Illinois’s judicial system to have a national black eye for years.

While 2006 is an election year with a shortened legislative session, there is no budget controversy to worry about (per the two-year deal done last year) and what could be more “politics is local” then protecting constituents’ right to have a case heard in their local court over and above a person from Oregon or Massachusetts.

We are hopeful that SB 1724 will progress this session and Illinois legislators will commit to keep Illinois courts open for Illinois cases.

Stephen C. Schneider is the regional vice president, Midwest Region of the American Insurance Association. The American Insurance Association represents 423 insurance companies that provide all lines of property and casualty insurance and write more than $99 billion annually in premiums.