Aiding and Abetting
In this unpublished opinion, the First District held that a complaint against a lawyer was properly dismissed as time-barred. The court held that the plaintiff’s claims for fraud, aiding and abetting fraud, breach of fiduciary duty and conspiracy were properly subject to the two year attorney statute of limitations, and that the statute began to run when the plaintiff learned of the lawyer’s alleged misrepresentations.
(This is for informational purposes and is not legal advice.)
Farwell v. Senior Servs. Assocs., Inc., 2012 IL App (2d) 110669, 970 N.E.2d 49 (malicious prosecution requires malice independent of desire to serve client)
Salaymeh v. InterQual, Inc., 155 Ill. App. 3d 1040, 508 N.E.2d 1155 (5th Dist. 1987)
Thornwood, Inc. v. Jenner & Block, 344 Ill. App. 3d 15, 799 N.E.2d 756 (1st Dist. 2003)
Grimes v. Saikley, 388 Ill. App. 3d 802, 904 N.E.2d 183 (4th Dist. 2009)
Bosak v. McDonough, 192 Ill. App. 3d 799, 549 N.E.2d 643 (1st Dist. 1989) (evidence insufficient to establish conspiracy)