Spurned Lover Can't Collect Damages
01-01-2003
A recent Cook County Circuit Court judgment in the case of Kindra Shaw v. Werner Zahn, Case No. 97 L 10830, found in favor of the defendant to dismiss charges that the plaintiff's former lover had "controlled" her in her suit seeking punitive damages after a love affair ended unhappily. In a summary judgment by Judge Martin Agran, the court held the plaintiff was not entitled to pursue damages based on allegations of intentional infliction of emotional distress. The Chicago-based firm of Novack and Macey successfully represented the defendant.
According to Novack and Macey partner P. Andrew Fleming: "This finding supports the sensible idea that adults should be free conduct to themselves like adults in a consensual intimate relationship." As noted in the memo supporting the summary judgment, "tort law does not and should not pick winners and losers in such relationships."
Fleming said the plaintiff had previously failed in her attempt to pursue breach-of-promise allegations because the couple had never made concrete plans to marry. In the present action, he explained, the plaintiff had hoped to use a different legal approach, intentional infliction of distress, to pursue a claim for punitive damages of $1 million.
This was inappropriate, Fleming said, because her charges, the principal one being that the defendant was not monogamous and sometimes deceived her about this, "did not fall beyond the boundaries of what is tolerable in a civilized society." As noted in Fleming's memorandum: "Simply put, society tolerates such conduct every day."
The judge agreed with Fleming's statement: "Ordinary adults are deemed able to choose either to participate in consensual sexual relationships without suffering severe emotional distress or, if the distress becomes unendurable, to leave." According to Fleming, this case is akin to palimony claims accepted in California courts, but rejected in Illinois. Novack and Macey partner Stephen J. Siegel joined Fleming in preparing the motion, and successfully argued it to Judge Agran.
Founded in 1984, Novack and Macey is a litigation firm that concentrates on complex commercial cases. The firm has successfully represented clients in a wide variety of business disputes, including matters involving banking, contracts, class actions, RICO, securities, real estate, land use, partnerships and close corporations, antitrust, insurance coverage, environmental matters, business torts and employment-related issues. Novack and Macey attorneys have honed their skills in courtrooms, mediations and arbitrations nationwide. Clients include corporations, institutions, investment ventures, partnerships and individuals.
For further information about Kindra Shaw v. Werner Zahn, please contact P. Andrew Fleming, Esq., at 312.419.6900.