Federal and State Reviewing Court Cases

PREVAILING AT TRIAL IS IMPORTANT. MAKING SURE YOUR TRIAL COURT AWARD IS UPHELD, OR THAT YOU HAVE THE PROPER RECORD TO PROCEED TO THE APPELLATE COURT IN THE EVENT YOU DO NOT PREVAIL, IS WHY YOUR LAW FIRM MUST BE ACQUAINTED WITH APPELLATE LAW.

SOME INTERESTING CASES HANDLED BY THE ARMSTRONG TEAM AT THE REVIEWING COURT LEVEL THROUGH THE YEARS:

IN RE MARRIAGE OF FISHMAN - Ill.App.Ct. 1st District, No. 1-06-2727, March 3, 2008, Rule 23.

The Armstrong firm successfully defended the father against the mother’s appeal where she claimed that the father owed her up to twenty thousand dollars of retroactive child support.

ARRELLANO V GROSPE, - Ill.App.Ct. 1st District, No. 1-01-0587 November 2, 2001. Rule 23

The Armstrong firm successfully defended an appeal concerning an interstate custody battle under the UCCJA.

BANKERS TRUST v. BENEFICIAL ILLINOIS, ET AL vs. ESTATE OF WEBSTER CLAYTON III, deceased. August 5, 1996, U.S.Ct OF APPEALS- 7th Circuit, No. 95-3522.

The Armstrong firm successfully appealed from the Judge James Holderman’s U.S. District Court order denying our client intervention in a Bank’s foreclosure action of the former marital residence. The Seventh Circuit vacated Judge Holderman’s order and held that our clients interest in a parcel of real estate awarded by a divorce court trumped the interest of the Bank. Our firm eventually recovered from the Bank the full amount due the client.

326 Ill.App.3d 760, 761 N.E.2d 218, 260 Ill.Dec. 374

Appellate Court of Illinois,
First District, Second Division.
Beatryce LIPSCOMB, on behalf of Veronica LIPSCOMB, a minor, Plaintiff-Appellant,
v.
Tyree WELLS, Defendant-Appellee, and Cross Appellant.

No. 1-00-3793.
Nov. 27, 2001.

Adjudicated father petitioned for relief from a prior parentage judgment. The Circuit Court, Cook County, Melvin J. Cole, J., granted the petition. Mother appealed. The Appellate Court, Gordon, J., held that mother's conduct constituted “fraudulent concealment” regarding child's parentage, as basis for tolling the two-year limitations period for putative father to seek relief from parentage judgment.

Plaintiff was not merely silent on the issue of V.L.'s paternity. Rather, plaintiff asserted with certainty in her initial verified complaint of June 3, 1988, that defendant was V.L.'s father. We thus hold that the trial court did not abuse its discretion in finding that plaintiff fraudulently concealed the true paternity of her child.

This is consistent with the holdings of other jurisdictions. Generally courts have held that concealment of the paternity of a child from a man held liable for paternity of that child is fraud.

Affirmed.

**219 *761 ***375 Richard A. Devine, State's Attorney (Robert J. Ruiz, Deputy State's Attorney, Mary T. Donoghue, Assistant State's Attorney, Leonard N. Foster, Assistant State's Attorney, of counsel), Chicago, for Plaintiff-Appellant.

Edwin R. Armstrong, Gregory C. Armstrong, Armstrong & Donnelly, Ltd., Chicago, for Defendant-Appellee.

272 Ill.App.3d 653, 650 N.E.2d 569, 208 Ill.Dec. 875

In re MARRIAGE OF Daniel J. SCHWEIHS, Petitioner-Appellant,
and Melinda Schweihs, Respondent-Appellee.

Nos. 1-94-0610, 1-94-0829. May 5, 1995.

In divorce action, the Circuit Court, Cook County, James G. Donegan, and James B. Klein, JJ., bifurcated proceedings, dissolved marriage, and ordered sale of husband's interest in shareholder derivative suit for $4.2 million dollars. Husband appealed. The Appellate Court, McNulty, J., held that: (1) husband was not entitled to substitution of judge; (2) record showed adequate grounds for bifurcation; and (3) order to sell was proper.

Affirmed

Armstrong & Donnelly, Ltd., Chicago (Edwin R. Armstrong and Gregory C. Armstrong, of counsel), for appellant.

Edward T. Joyce & Associates, P.C. Davis, Friedman, Zavett, Kane and MacRae, Chicago, for appellee.

101 Ill.App.3d 422, 428 N.E.2d 578, 57 Ill.Dec. 28

Appellate Court of Illinois, First District, First Division.
In re the MARRIAGE OF Wayne H. PEARSON, Petitioner-Appellee,
and
Joan D. Pearson, Respondent-Appellant.

No. 80-2242.
Oct. 26, 1981.

Appeal was taken by former wife from judgment of the Circuit Court, Cook County, James J. Meehan, J., sustaining petition of former husband to terminate unallocated maintenance payments. The Appellate Court, Campbell, P. J., held that phrase “now and forever,” which appeared in preamble to operative provisions of marital settlement agreement incorporated in judgment of dissolution and which was to effect that parties would settle between themselves now and forever questions of alimony and support, was merely precatory and, absent an express provision precluding or limiting modification of agreement, did not preclude husband from seeking in subsequent years to terminate unallocated maintenance payments because wife had remarried and minor child of parties had commenced residing with husband.

Affirmed.

Frank T. Steponate and Thomas G. Merkel, Chicago, for respondent-appellant.

Edwin R. Armstrong and James R. Donnelly, Chicago, for petitioner-appellee.

126 Ill.App.2d 461, 262 N.E.2d 54, 55 A.L.R.3d 741

Appellate Court of Illinois, First District.
In the ESTATE of Rosina Merle CARR, Deceased,
Edward A. LOSS, Jr., Petitioner-Appellee,
v.
CONTINENTAL ILLINOIS NATIONAL BANK AND TRUST COMPANY OF CHICAGO, as Successor Executor of the Will of Rosina Merle Carr, Deceased, Mabel Merle Curran, individually and as Executor of the Will of Henry J. Merle, Deceased, John M. Boyle and Henry Joseph Roach, Respondents-Appellants,
Barbara Ann Loss, a Minor, Respondent-Appellee.

Gen. No. 53272.
June 26, 1970.

Will contest. The Circuit Court, Cook County, John A. Pavlik, J., found will had been revoked and beneficiaries named in will and executor appealed. The Appellate Court, Alloy, J., held that order admitting copy of lost will to probate was not res judicata so as to preclude opponents from bringing action to contest will on any ground including will's revocation and that trial court's finding that lost will, copy of which had been admitted to probate, had been revoked by decedent was not contrary to weight of evidence. Trial court's finding that lost will, copy of which had been admitted to probate, had been revoked by decedent was not contrary to weight of evidence.

Affirmed.

Sidley & Austin, Chicago, for respondents-appellants; Alice M. Bright, William H. Thigpen, Sylvia O. Decker, Chicago, of counsel.

Friedman, Armstrong & Donnelly, Chicago, for petitioner-appellee; Edwin R. Armstrong, , Chicago, of counsel.

Supreme Court of Illinois.
The PEOPLE of the State of Illinois, Appellee,
v.
Edward HOGAN, Appellant.

No. 40891.
Jan. 28, 1970.

Defendant was convicted of murder, and from a judgment of the Circuit Court, Cook County, Robert L. Hunter, J., dismissing his postconviction petition, the defendant appealed. The Supreme Court, Schaefer, J., held that record disclosed that defendant, who had entered plea of guilty to indictment charging murder, did not receive the kind of representation to which he was entitled upon his postconviction petition, and hence judgment dismissing the petition would be reversed and cause remanded for further proceeding.

Reversed and remanded.

John J. Dobry, Chicago (Edwin R. Armstrong, Chicago, of counsel) appointed by the court, for appellant.

William J. Scott, Atty. Gen., Springfield, and Edward V. Hanrahan, State's Atty., Chicago (James B. Zagel, Asst. Atty. Gen., and Elmer C. Kissane and John R. McClory, Asst. State's Attys., of counsel) for the People.