Section 815 ILCS 5/13 - Private and other civil remedies; securities

2 Analyses of this statute by attorneys

  1. Illinois Supreme Court Debates Damages Measures for Malpractice in Securities Cases

    Sedgwick LLPKirk JenkinsJuly 2, 2014

    The Appellate Court reversed the judgment in part. The Court held that there was no basis under the statute (815 ILCS 5/13(A)) for reducing the value of each stock purchase by a prorated share of the plaintiff’s recovery from other sources before calculating interest. The court also rejected the defendants’ claim that the award of attorneys fees and costs was punitive in nature, and thus violated the bar on awarding punitive damages in malpractice actions.Justice Robert E. Gordon dissented in part, pointing out that by refusing to allow an offset for the plaintiffs’ 2007 merits settlement, the Court was in effect holding that the $3.2 million merits settlement continued to bear interest from the defendants for seven years after the plaintiffs received it.Counsel for the defendants began by pointing that damages in the action are $1.3 million, but the plaintiff nevertheless is seeking another $18-21 million in statutory interest and fees.

  2. Illinois Supreme Court to Decide Whether Interest and Fees are Available on Legal Malpractice Claim

    Sedgwick LLPKirk JenkinsNovember 11, 2013

    The Appellate Court affirmed in part and reversed in part. The damages issues turn on the interpretation of section 13(A) of the Securities Law, 815 ILCS 5/13(A). The majority chose to follow the decision in Kugler v. Southmark Realty Partners III, which held that interest should be calculated on the full amount paid for the stock, rather than offsetting the payment with any settlements first.