Abbey Adams Logo

Defending Liability, Workers' Compensation, Employment Claims and Appeals Since 1982

  • Skip to main content
  • Skip to primary sidebar
  • Skip to footer

  • Bloglovin
  • Facebook
  • LinkedIn
  • Phone
  • Home
  • Locations
    • Where We Practice in Florida
    • Where We Practice In Illinois
  • Practices
  • Attorneys
    • David J. Abbey
    • Jeffrey M. Adams
    • Robert P. Byelick
    • Jennifer J. Kennedy
    • John D. Kiernan (1947-2016)
    • V. Joseph Mueller
  • Blog
  • Links
  • Contact Us

Where We Practice In Illinois

Firm lawyers are licensed to practice in the state of Illinois including: all of the state courts and the United States District Court for the Central District of Illinois.


Illinois Circuits Courts

Fifth Circuit

Clark County

  • Marshall

Coles County

  • Charleston

Cumberland County

  • Toledo

Edgar County

  • Paris

Vermilion County

  • Danville

Sixth Circuit

Champaign County

  • Urbana

DeWitt County

  • Clinton

Douglas County

  • Tuscola

Macon County

  • Decatur

Moultrie County

  • Sullivan

Piatt County

  • Monticello

Tenth Circuit

Marshall County

  • Lacon

Peoria County

  • Peoria

Putnam County

  • Hennepin

Stark County

  • Toulon

Tazewell County

  • Pekin

Eleventh Circuit

Ford County

  • Paxton

Livingston County

  • Pontiac

Logan County

  • Lincoln

McLean County

  • Bloomington

Woodford County

  • Eureka

opens in a new windowIllinois Circuit Court

Thirteenth Circuit

Bureau County

  • Princeton

Grundy County

  • Morris

LaSalle County

  • Ottawa

Twenty-First Circuit

Iroquois County

  • Watseka

Kankakee County

  • Kankakee

Illinois State Appellate Districts

Third Appellate District

Marshall County

  • Lacon

Peoria County

  • Peoria

Putnam County

  • Hennepin

Stark County

  • Toulon

Tazewell County

  • Pekin

Grundy County

  • Morris

Lasalle County

  • Ottawa

Lasalle County

  • Ottawa

Iroquois County

  • Watseka

Kankakee County

  • Kankakee

Comprising the:
10th, 13th, and 21st Circuits

Fourth Appellate District

Clark County

  • Marshall

Coles County

  • Charleston

Cumberland County

  • Toledo

Edgar County

  • Paris

Vermillion County

  • Danville

Champaign County

  • Urbana

DeWitt County

  • Clinton

Douglas County

  • Tuscola

Macon County

  • Decatur

Moultrie County

  • Sullivan

opens in a new windowIllinois Appellate Court

Fourth Appellate District Cont.

Piatt County

  • Monticello

Ford County

  • Paxton

Livingston County

  • Pontiac

Logan County

  • Lincoln

Mclean County

  • Bloomington

Woodford County

  • Eureka

Comprising the:
5th, 6th, and 11th Circuits


United States Court for the Central District of Illinois

Firm attorneys are admitted to practice in the US District Court for the Central District of Illinois.

Peoria Division

Stark County

  • Toulon

Putnam County

  • Hennepin

Marshall County

  • Lacon

Peoria County

  • Peoria

Woodford County

  • Eureka

Livingston County

  • Pontiac

Fulton County

  • Lewiston

Tazewell County

  • Pekin

McLean County

  • Bloomington

 

Urbana Division

Kankakee County

  • Kankakee

Iroquois County

  • Watseka

Ford County

  • Paxton

Champaign County

  • Urbana

Vermillion County

  • Danville

Urbana Division Cont.

Macon County

  • Decatur

Piatt County

  • Monticello

Moultrie County

  • Sullivan

Coles County

  • Charleston

Douglas County

  • Tuscola

Douglas County

  • Tuscola

Douglas County

  • Tuscola

Edgar County

  • Paris

Sangamon County

  • Springfield

Greene County

  • Carrolton

Macoupin County

  • Carlinville

Christian County

  • Taylorville

Shelby County

  • Shelbyville

Montgomery County

  • Hillsboro

opens in a new windowIllinois District Court

Springfield Division

Mason County

  • Havana

Logan County

  • Lincoln

DeWitt County

  • Clinton

Menard County

  • Petersburg

Cass County

  • Virginia

Brown County

  • Mt. Sterling

Springfield Division Cont.

Brown County

  • Mt. Sterling

Adams County

  • Quincy

Pike County

  • Pittsfield

Scott County

  • Winchester

Morgan County

  • Jacksonville

United States Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit

Appeals from the United States District Court for the Central District of Illinois go to the Seventh Circuit. A member of the Firm is admitted to practice in the Seventh Circuit.


United States Supreme Court

Matters from Illinois State and Federal Courts may be reviewed by the United States Supreme Court. Members of the Firm are admitted to practice before the United States Supreme Court.


Primary Sidebar

Recent Posts

  • Insurance — Homeowners — Windstorm loss — Notice of loss — Timeliness — Prejudice to insurer — No error in entering summary judgment in favor of insurer based on determination that insured failed to overcome presumption that insurer was prejudiced by his failure to timely report claim for hurricane damage — Insured failed to act with reasonable dispatch and within a reasonable time where insured waited two years and seven months to report claim of hurricane damage to his roof — Conclusory affidavits submitted by insured in opposition to summary judgment were insufficient to rebut presumption of prejudice where passage of time rendered insurer unable to determine what current damage was directly attributable to the storm — Court rejects argument that policy was ambiguous because it contained a clause imposing a blanket bar on any hurricane-related claim beyond three-year window and a second clause requiring insured to provide prompt notice of any claim — Clauses, when read together, require an insured to file any hurricane-related claim within three years of the storm, and to act swiftly upon discovering damages
  • Insurance — Uninsured motorist — Bad faith — Complaint — Amendment — Addition of claim for punitive damages — Action alleging that insurer violated law by issuing policies without a written rejection form and by accepting verbal rejections of UM coverage — Error to grant insured’s motion for leave to add punitive damages claim where insured failed to provide reasonable basis to find that insurer’s acts occurred with such frequency as to indicate a general business practice, and were willful, wanton, and malicious and in reckless disregard for insured’s rights
  • Consumer law — Deceptive and Unfair Trade Practices — Proposal for settlement — Attorney’s fees — Costs — Prevailing party — Where partial summary judgment as to liability was granted in favor of plaintiff, but jury awarded no damages, it was not an abuse of discretion for trial court to deny defendant’s request for attorney’s fees as a prevailing party on Florida Deceptive and Unfair Trade Practices Act claim — No error in denying fees and costs under proposals for settlement presented to trial court — None of the proposals proffered satisfied strict requirements of section 768.79 and rule 1.442 where proposals required plaintiff to execute a release but failed to describe release with sufficient detail, contained ambiguity as to punitive damages, and required payment from date of settlement without defining such date — Error to deny request for costs under section 57.041 — A zero judgment constitutes a judgment in favor of the defendant for purposes of recovery of costs under the statute
  • Torts — Premises liability — Slip and fall — Discovery — Relevance — Appeals — Certiorari — Order requiring defendant’s corporate representative to address areas of inquiry related to defendant’s corporate-wide operations is quashed — Allowing corporate-wide discovery amounted to carte blanche discovery that results in irreparable harm and departs from essential requirements of the law — Information is not discoverable based on its relevance to show negligent mode of operation because, under section 768.0755, negligent mode of operation is not a viable theory of recovery in slip-and-fall cases
  • Insurance — Uninsured motorist — Bad faith — Complaint — Amendment — Addition of claim for punitive damages — Action alleging that insurer violated law by issuing policies without a written rejection form and by accepting verbal rejections of UM coverage — Error to grant insured’s motion for leave to add punitive damages claim where insured failed to provide reasonable basis to find that insurer’s acts occurred with such frequency as to indicate a general business practice, and were willful, wanton, and malicious and in reckless disregard for insured’s rights

Blog Archives

Footer

The materials available at this website are for informational purposes only and not for the purpose of providing legal advice. You should contact your attorney to obtain advice with respect to any particular issue or problem. Use of and access to this Website or any of the e-mail links contained within the site do not create an attorney-client relationship between Abbey, Adams, Byelick & Mueller, L.L.P. and the user or browser. The opinions expressed at or through this site are the opinions of the individual author and may not reflect the opinions of the firm or any individual attorney. opens in a new windowAbbey, Adams, Byelick, & Mueller XML Sitemap Index

Copyright © 2023 · Abbey Adams Byelick & Mueller, LLP · All Rights Reserved · Defending Liability, Workers' Compensation, Employment Claims and Appeals Since 1982