Merrilees v. Merrilees
2013 IL App (1st) 121897
Ill. App. Ct.2013Background
- Marriage dissolution between Merrilees and Robert; Spot Trading, LLC valued in dispute over marital/nonmarital property; MSA awarded plaintiff $18 million plus home; settlement of attorney fees and related releases in June 2009; plaintiff later alleged deception/fraud and sought vacatur via 2-1401 and pursued RICO, fraud, conspiracy, and legal malpractice claims; trial court dismissed with prejudice after four amendments; appellate review conducted de novo.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether RICO claims survive pleading requirements | Merrilees alleges a pattern of racketeering and an enterprise | Defendants contend no pattern or enterprise; insufficient specificity | RICO claims properly dismissed; no pattern or enterprise shown |
| Whether fraud claims were adequately pled | Defendants misrepresented asset value and marital nature of Spot | Documents were expressions of opinion; no misstatement of material fact pleaded | Fraud counts dismissed for lack of specific misstatements and reasonable reliance |
| Whether civil conspiracy claim is viable | Defendants conspired to undervalue assets and mislead plaintiff | No express agreement or overt tortious act pleaded | Conspiracy count fails for lack of agreement and actionable conduct |
| Whether legal malpractice claims were adequately pled | Attorneys breached duties by advising, failing to inquire, and self-dealing | Plaintiff failed to plead facts showing duty, breach, causation, and damages | Legal malpractice counts dismissed for failure to plead essential elements |
Key Cases Cited
- H.J. Inc. v. Northwestern Bell Telephone Co., 492 U.S. 229 (U.S. 1989) (continuity and pattern requirements for RICO)
- Jennings v. Auto Meter Products, Inc., 495 F.3d 466 (7th Cir. 2007) (RICO pattern limitations to avoid garden-variety fraud)
- Goren v. New Vision International, Inc., 156 F.3d 721 (7th Cir. 1998) (requirement to plead agreement for RICO conspiracy)
- Rodgers v. Peoples Gas, Light & Coke Co., 315 Ill. App. 3d 340 (2000) (elements of a RICO claim in Illinois context)
- Vicom, Inc. v. Harbridge Merchant Services, Inc., 20 F.3d 771 (7th Cir. 1994) (continuity concepts for pattern of racketeering)
- Lagen v. Balcor Co., 274 Ill. App. 3d 11 (1995) (fraud elements and heightened pleading standard)
- Chatham Surgicore, Ltd. v. Health Care Service Corp., 356 Ill. App. 3d 795 (2005) (high specificity required for fraud pleadings)
- Connick v. Suzuki Motor Co., 174 Ill. 2d 482 (1996) (agency and reliance considerations in fraud)
- Redelmann v. Claire-Sprayway, Inc., 375 Ill. App. 3d 912 (2007) (conspiracy pleading standards)
- Ignarski v. Norbut, 271 Ill. App. 3d 522 (1995) (proximate cause and meritorious underlying action)