The report cited a number of different factors, including the legislatures' expansion of pro-plaintiff legislation and "no-injury" lawsuits as the basis for the state’s poor ranking.
Illinois ranked No. 7 on last year’s annual survey of judicial hellholes by the American Tort Reform Foundation. The report cited a number of different factors, including the legislatures’ expansion of pro-plaintiff legislation and “no-injury” lawsuits as the basis for the state’s poor ranking.
NFIB Illinois state director Mark Grant agrees with the report findings. “Each year we see more legislation aimed at employers that invariably includes increased civil liability action,” said Grant. “Anyone not seeing that is not looking very hard. Small businesses in Illinois face the specter of financial ruin from one lawsuit lurking around the corner.”
According to the report, excessive tort costs families and businesses almost $4.5 billion in costs and 81,685 jobs annually. The report highlights that the Chicago-Naperville-Elgin metro area bears the brunt of the burden, with $3.8 billion in direct costs and 68,024 jobs annually due to lawsuits.
One of the most dangerous judicial actions impacting small business was the state’s Supreme Court’s ruling that sellers and distributors of products can be held liable for injury if the plaintiff is unable to collect on a judgement against a foreign manufacturer. In the Cassidy v. China Vitamins, the court ruled that “other circumstances that effectively bar recovery of the full measure of judgment damages awarded” allowed the plaintiff to seek monetary damages from non-manufacturers in the product’s supply chain. As a result of this decision, small businesses merely selling imported products can be sued if damages cannot be obtained from the foreign manufacturer.
Another important decision, Rosenbach v. Six Flags Entertainment, opened the floodgates to no-injury Biometric Information Privacy Act (BIPA) lawsuits. BIPA requires companies to inform individuals in writing, as well as obtain a written release, prior to retaining biometric data. Trial lawyers initiated class-action lawsuits against businesses that used fingerprints in their day-to-day operations for security and accountability purposes, including systems used to “clock-in” employees. Although none of the data was sold to other companies or used for anything other than internal accountability, the lawsuits were allowed to proceed.
