Chicago Title Insurance Company v. Sinikovic et al
| Chicago Title Insurance Company |
| Elvir Sinikovic, Dennis Quijano, Larisa Spirtovic, M&M Flooring and Construction, Inc., Rainbow As, Inc., Adnan Spirtovic, DC&L, LLC and Prestige Of Chicago, Inc. |
| 1:2011cv02504 |
| April 13, 2011 |
| US District Court for the Northern District of Illinois |
| Chicago Office |
| Cook |
| Charles R. Norgle |
| Truth in Lending |
| 28 U.S.C. ยง 1332 |
| None |
Follow case documents by RSS
Available Case Documents
The following documents for this case are available for you to view or download:
| Document Text |
|---|
Filing
143
OPINION AND ORDER written by the Honorable Sara L. Ellis on 8/28/2015. For the foregoing reasons, Chicago Title's motion for summary judgment 134 is granted in part and denied in part. Summary judgment is entered against Elvir Sinikovic on the claims for breach of fiduciary duty (Count I), unjust enrichment (Count III), and accounting (Count IV). The Court finds that punitive damages are appropriate against Elvir Sinikovic but that the amount of punitive damages is a question to be decided by a jury. Summary judgment is entered against Dennis Quijano, Larisa Spirtovic, M&M Flooring & Construction, Inc., Rainbow AS, Inc., DC&L, LLC, and Prestige of Chicago, Inc. on the claim for unjust enrichment (Count III). A constructive trust is imposed on the $40,000 invested by DC&L in the property located at 2925 W. Touhy, Unit 3, Chicago, Illinois. Mailed notice.(pjg, )
|
Use the links below to access additional information about this case on the US Court's PACER system. A subscription to PACER is required.
Access this case on the Illinois Northern District Court's Electronic Court Filings (ECF) System
- Search for Party Aliases
- Associated Cases
- Attorneys
- Case File Location
- Case Summary
- Docket Report
- History/Documents
- Parties
- Related Transactions
- Check Status
Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.
