Quantcast

COOK COUNTY RECORD

Monday, May 20, 2024

Woman appeals case requesting statutory costs and prejudgment interest

State Court
5ffe1017 5064 40a5 9852 a90d8b56306e

hammer and American flag | https://unsplash.com/

The lawsuit involves Irma Jordan, the plaintiff-appellant, and Esmeralda Macedo, the defendant-appellee. The case was filed in the Appellate Court of Illinois, First District with the court case ID 1-23-0079 on May 3, 2024. The dispute is centered around a personal injury claim following a motor vehicle accident.

The attorneys for the appellant are Craig M. Sandberg of Sandberg Law Office, PC and Jonathan W. Goken and Cameron W. Ash of Lewis, Brisbois, Bisgaard and Smith, LLP for the appellee.

Ms. Jordan alleged that she sustained injuries due to Ms. Macedo rear-ending her vehicle at an intersection. She claimed that she incurred medical and other expenses exceeding $14,000 as a result of the incident. On October 26, 2022, an arbitrator found in favor of Ms. Jordan and against Ms. Macedo for an amount of $13,070.

Following the arbitration award in her favor, Ms. Jordan sought statutory costs including filing fees and summons fees as well as prejudgment interest as the prevailing party. However, the circuit court denied her request stating that the arbitration award contained the full amount which would be reduced to a judgment.

The plaintiff is seeking for statutory costs and prejudgment interest based on statutory language and contends that these amounts could only have been requested from the circuit court after it was determined that she was the prevailing party.

Justices Lyle, Mikva and Navarro agree that the case was filed on October 12th, 2021. Prejudgment interest began to accrue on that date.  Ms. Macedo's highest written offer pf settlement was $5000, $8070 less than awarded to Ms. Jackson.  Ms. Jackson is entitles to prejudgment interest (6%) on that $8070 for the 13 months of the trail.  

Justices Lyle and Navarro both agreed that the statutory costs for Ms. Jordan will not be reimbursed.  Justice Mikva dissents but is overruled by the majority.

The case orders are affirmed in part and reversed in part. 

ORGANIZATIONS IN THIS STORY

More News