<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8"?>
<rss version="2.0">
   <channel>
      <title>In Their Opinion</title>
      <link>http://www.intheiropinion.com/</link>
      <description></description>
      <language>en</language>
      <copyright>Copyright 2012</copyright>
      <lastBuildDate>Fri, 03 Feb 2012 16:51:08 -0500</lastBuildDate>
      <pubDate>Fri, 03 Feb 2012 16:51:08 -0500</pubDate>
      <generator>http://www.movabletype.org</generator>
      <docs>http://blogs.law.harvard.edu/tech/rss</docs> 

            <item>
         <title>Fraud Suit Barred By Earlier State Court Dismissal</title>
         <description>CHICAGO TITLE LAND TRUST COMPANY v. POTASH CORPORATION OF SASKATCHEWAN SALES LIMITED (December 27, 2011) Potash Corporation of Saskatchewan Sales Limited signed a 10-year lease with Chicago Title Land Trust Co. in 1995 for space in a Skokie, Illinois office building. Several years later, Potash wanted significantly more space in</description>
         <link>http://www.intheiropinion.com/2012/02/articles/civil-procedure/fraud-suit-barred-by-earlier-state-court-dismissal/</link>
         <guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.intheiropinion.com/2012/02/articles/civil-procedure/fraud-suit-barred-by-earlier-state-court-dismissal/</guid>
         <pubDate>Fri, 03 Feb 2012 16:46:10 -0500</pubDate>
         <author>MRigney@KelleyDrye.com (Michael Rigney)</author>
      </item>
            <item>
         <title>Person With Right At Risk On Appeal Gets To Be A Party</title>
         <description>IN RE: TRANS UNION CORPORATION PRIVACY LITIGATION (December 27, 2011) Over a decade ago, a number of class actions were filed against Trans Union Corp. for violating the Fair Credit Reporting Act. The cases were consolidated and eventually settled for $75 million. Judge Gettleman (N.D. Ill.) entered an order that</description>
         <link>http://www.intheiropinion.com/2012/02/articles/appellate-procedure/person-with-right-at-risk-on-appeal-gets-to-be-a-party/</link>
         <guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.intheiropinion.com/2012/02/articles/appellate-procedure/person-with-right-at-risk-on-appeal-gets-to-be-a-party/</guid>
         <pubDate>Fri, 03 Feb 2012 13:34:01 -0500</pubDate>
         <author>MRigney@KelleyDrye.com (Michael Rigney)</author>
      </item>
            <item>
         <title>Record Does Not Support IDEA Violation</title>
         <description>M.B. v. HAMILTON SOUTHEASTERN SCHOOLS (December 22, 2011) M.B., the son of Damian and Amy Berns, was four years old when he suffered a traumatic brain injury. The Berns approached Hamilton Southeastern Schools for information about special education services. Within a few months, both the Berns&apos; psychologist (Dr. Bryan Hudson)</description>
         <link>http://www.intheiropinion.com/2012/02/articles/federal-statute-other/record-does-not-support-idea-violation/</link>
         <guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.intheiropinion.com/2012/02/articles/federal-statute-other/record-does-not-support-idea-violation/</guid>
         <pubDate>Fri, 03 Feb 2012 09:31:38 -0500</pubDate>
         <author>MRigney@KelleyDrye.com (Michael Rigney)</author>
      </item>
            <item>
         <title>Potential Creditor&apos;s Claim Appeal Is Moot Once Property Is Sold Pursuant To Approved Liquidation Plan</title>
         <description>IN RE: RIVER WEST PLAZA - CHICAGO, LLC (December 22, 2011) River West Plaza - Chicago owned and operated a shopping center in Chicago before it filed for bankruptcy. At the time of its filing, Frank Schwab was the plaintiff in a state court case against River West. He filed</description>
         <link>http://www.intheiropinion.com/2012/02/articles/bankruptcy/potential-creditors-claim-appeal-is-moot-once-property-is-sold-pursuant-to-approved-liquidation-plan/</link>
         <guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.intheiropinion.com/2012/02/articles/bankruptcy/potential-creditors-claim-appeal-is-moot-once-property-is-sold-pursuant-to-approved-liquidation-plan/</guid>
         <pubDate>Thu, 02 Feb 2012 16:39:32 -0500</pubDate>
         <author>MRigney@KelleyDrye.com (Michael Rigney)</author>
      </item>
            <item>
         <title>A Municipal Fine Is Not An FDCPA &quot;Debt&quot;</title>
         <description><![CDATA[GULLEY v. MARKOFF &amp; KRASNY (December 22, 2011) In 2008, the City of Chicago imposed fines on Victor Gulley for Municipal Code violations. Gulley did not pay the fines because he no longer owned the real property associated with the violations. The City retained the law firm of Markoff &amp;]]></description>
         <link>http://www.intheiropinion.com/2012/02/articles/consumer-protection-law/a-municipal-fine-is-not-an-fdcpa-debt/</link>
         <guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.intheiropinion.com/2012/02/articles/consumer-protection-law/a-municipal-fine-is-not-an-fdcpa-debt/</guid>
         <pubDate>Thu, 02 Feb 2012 14:20:06 -0500</pubDate>
         <author>MRigney@KelleyDrye.com (Michael Rigney)</author>
      </item>
            <item>
         <title>Record Did Not Support Prevention Doctrine Claim</title>
         <description><![CDATA[TABATABAI v. WEST COAST LIFE INSURANCE COMPANY (December 16, 2011) Firouzeh Keshmiri submitted an application for a $500,000 life insurance policy to West Coast Life Insurance Company in 2006. She chose the &quot;Super Preferred&quot; classification and submitted her first $100 payment. She also signed a conditional receipt agreement, which provided]]></description>
         <link>http://www.intheiropinion.com/2012/02/articles/insurance-law/record-did-not-support-prevention-doctrine-claim/</link>
         <guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.intheiropinion.com/2012/02/articles/insurance-law/record-did-not-support-prevention-doctrine-claim/</guid>
         <pubDate>Wed, 01 Feb 2012 12:04:13 -0500</pubDate>
         <author>MRigney@KelleyDrye.com (Michael Rigney)</author>
      </item>
            <item>
         <title>Speech Limitation Based On Speaker&apos;s Identity Is A Content Based Restriction</title>
         <description>SURITA v. HYDE (December 22, 2011) Waukegan, Illinois enacted an ordinance in 2002 pursuant to which the police could impound a vehicle if its driver was caught driving without a license or proof of insurance. The ordinance was very unpopular in the city, particularly among the minority population. At a</description>
         <link>http://www.intheiropinion.com/2012/02/articles/constitutional-law/speech-limitation-based-on-speakers-identity-is-a-content-based-restriction/</link>
         <guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.intheiropinion.com/2012/02/articles/constitutional-law/speech-limitation-based-on-speakers-identity-is-a-content-based-restriction/</guid>
         <pubDate>Wed, 01 Feb 2012 09:25:09 -0500</pubDate>
         <author>MRigney@KelleyDrye.com (Michael Rigney)</author>
      </item>
            <item>
         <title>Arguments Not Made Below Are Waived</title>
         <description><![CDATA[BROADDUS v. SHIELDS (December 21, 2011) As of 2001, Bret Broaddus and Kevin Shields were partners in Will Partners, LLC. Broaddus was in a bad car accident in November of that year. Between February and September 2002, a legal guardian conducted Broaddus' affairs. In early 2003, Shields purchased Broaddus&rsquo; interest]]></description>
         <link>http://www.intheiropinion.com/2012/02/articles/statute-of-limitations/arguments-not-made-below-are-waived/</link>
         <guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.intheiropinion.com/2012/02/articles/statute-of-limitations/arguments-not-made-below-are-waived/</guid>
         <pubDate>Wed, 01 Feb 2012 08:59:38 -0500</pubDate>
         <author>MRigney@KelleyDrye.com (Michael Rigney)</author>
      </item>
            <item>
         <title>Motion Seeking To Direct Arbitration Panel Is Not A Motion To Compel Arbitration Under FAA</title>
         <description><![CDATA[BLUE CROSS BLUE SHIELD OF MASSACHUSETTS, INC. V. BCS INSURANCE CO. (December 16, 2011) BCS Insurance Co. is a captive insurer owned by the various state Blue Cross Blue Shield plans. The contract between BCS and the state plans requires arbitration if BCS declines a state plan&rsquo;s request for reimbursement.]]></description>
         <link>http://www.intheiropinion.com/2012/01/articles/jurisdiction/motion-seeking-to-direct-arbitration-panel-is-not-a-motion-to-compel-arbitration-under-faa/</link>
         <guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.intheiropinion.com/2012/01/articles/jurisdiction/motion-seeking-to-direct-arbitration-panel-is-not-a-motion-to-compel-arbitration-under-faa/</guid>
         <pubDate>Tue, 31 Jan 2012 15:50:21 -0500</pubDate>
         <author>MRigney@KelleyDrye.com (Michael Rigney)</author>
      </item>
            <item>
         <title>Post-Receivership Claims Against Receiver Are Barred By Collateral Estoppel</title>
         <description>VIRNICH v. VORWALD (December 20, 2011) Daniel Virnich was a director of Communications Products Corporation. CPC had a banking relationship with American Trust and Savings Bank. When CPC was experiencing financial difficulties in the early 2000s, the Bank asked for additional collateral or repayment and sought personal guarantees. Virnich alleges</description>
         <link>http://www.intheiropinion.com/2012/01/articles/civil-procedure/postreceivership-claims-against-receiver-are-barred-by-collateral-estoppel/</link>
         <guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.intheiropinion.com/2012/01/articles/civil-procedure/postreceivership-claims-against-receiver-are-barred-by-collateral-estoppel/</guid>
         <pubDate>Tue, 31 Jan 2012 15:29:36 -0500</pubDate>
         <author>MRigney@KelleyDrye.com (Michael Rigney)</author>
      </item>
      
   </channel>
</rss>
