Hinch Law

EPA's new renovation, repair, or painting (RRP) rules for remodeling contractors went into effect on April 22nd.   I wrote about this new rule on this page previously .  The Chicago Tribune ran an article over the weekend about the new rule and compliance issues.  The article does a good job at summarizing the issue - only about 200 out of 1,000 companies doing remodeling work in Illinois were RRP certified two days before the rule took effect, according to the EPA.   In the past months I have had the opportunity to discuss this rule with several chapters of the Home Builders Association of Illinois .  These groups have been very proactive in getting the word out to member contractors and scheduling training classes to help contractors get certified and comply with the new rule.  Also, the Illinois Department of Public Health's Lead Program has led a series of informational meetings around the State to inform contractors and answer questions about the...

If you're wondering where I've been for the past several weeks, have no fear!  I am alive and well.  In fact, I am pleased to announce that I have joined the legal practice of Mueller and Reece, LLC in Bloomington, Illinois.  I am excited to be a part of the Mueller and Reece team.  Please bear with me on this page for a while as I complete this transition.

The Second District Appellate Court of Illinois recently held that an owner by filing a demand under Section 34 of the Mechanics Lien Act (the Act) can be deemed to have waived a contractual right to compel arbitration.  The case is Illinois Concrete-I.C.I, Inc. v. Storefitters, Inc , No. 2-09-0854 (2nd Dist. 2010).  In Storefitters, the plaintiff contractor filed a mechanics lien claim alleging that the defendants had failed to pay it for its work.  The Defendants then served notice on the plaintiff pursuant to Section 34 of the Act, requiring the contractor to file suit to commence an action to enforce the lien within 30 days, or else forfeit the lien claim (the "Section 34 Demand").  The contractor filed suit as required, at which point the defendants filed a motion to compel arbitration pursuant to a mandatory arbitration clause in the parties' contract (it appears from the opinion that the contract language actually called for mediation followed by arbitration)...

This question came up recently as I was reviewing a construction contract.  The contract, as is common in the construction industry, contained an agreement to submit any disputes to binding arbitration, and specified the organization to manage the arbitration.  The problem was that by the time the dispute arose the designated arbitration organization was no longer in business.  What now?  This issue was addressed in the recent Illinois case Carr v. Gateway, Inc,  No. 5-07-0711 (5th Dist. 2009). Carr is a class action case in which the plaintiffs alleged that Gateway and Intel Corp. had violated consumer protection laws in Illinois and elsewhere in the U.S. by engaging in deceptive advertising regarding the capabilities of various computer processors.    Gateway moved to dismiss the case or alternatively to stay the proceedings and compel arbitration pursuant to an arbitration agreement included when the Carrs (the named plaintiffs seeking to represe...

This is the ninth and final part in a series of posts on the Illinois Home Repair and Remodeling Act (HRRA).  We have now discussed the law and its interpretation in each of the five Illinois Appellate Districts .  The key question at issue is this - does the HRRA act as a "shield" for the homeowner to prevent a contractor from collecting payment for work completed if the contractor did not comply with the HRRA?  Three of the five appellate districts (the First, Third, and Fourth) have held that the HRRA does shield the homeowner from at least some claims by a non-compliant contractor.  The Second and Fifth Districts have not disagreed.  But the appellate courts have disagreed as to what extent the homeowner is shielded.  The Illinois Supreme Court (IL SC) is scheduled to hear an appeal in at least one HRRA case later this year, which may result in a clearer, statewide interpretation of the HRRA. A bill ( SB 2540 ) has also been introduced at the Illino...

This is part eight in a series of posts on the Illinois Home Repair and Remodeling Act (HRRA), and the final post looking at the law in each of the Illinois appellate districts.  The previous posts: 1)  Introduction 2)  Statute 3)  Illinois Supreme Court opinion 4)  The 5th District 5)  The 4th District 6)  The 1st District 7)   The 2nd District Once again, here's the map of the Illinois Appellate Districts.  The Third District extends across the north central part of the state, and includes Will County, Kankakee County, Peoria County, and Rock Island County, among others.  I saved the Third District for last in this series because this district has issued the last two HRRA appellate opinions, both in January 2010.  The Third District also was the first district to issue an HRRA opinion, so I'll start there. In the 2005 case of Central Illinois Electrical Services, LLC v. Slepian ,1 the Third District became the first ...

We're up to part seven in a series of posts on the Illinois Home Repair and Remodeling Act (HRRA).  Here are some quick links to the previous posts for reference: 1) Introduction 2) Statute 3) Illinois Supreme Court opinion 4) The 5th District 5) The 4th District 6) The 1st District Next we look at the Second District.  Here's the map of the Illinois Appellate Districts.  The Second District is the northernmost district in Illinois, extending from Lake County to Jo Daviess and Carol counties.  The court meets in Elgin in Kane County. The Second District has issued two opinions involving the HRRA.  We have already discussed one of these cases - MD Electrical Contractors, Inc. v. Abrams , which is the only HRRA case to date to have been heard by the Illinois Supreme Court.1  The other Second District HRRA opinion was published in September 2009, Artisan Design Build, Inc. v. Bilstrom .2 In Artisan , the following facts were alleged by the plaint...