You and your partner built the company as equals. Fifty-fifty feltfair at the start. It does not feel fair now. One of you wants to cash out and the other wants to keep building. Or you cannot agree on payroll, on a distribution, on whether to take the loan, and every vote splits two to two. Checks wait for a second signature that never comes. Employees ask who is in charge, and you no longer have a clean answer.

A 50/50 company that stops agreeing can freeze in place. The deadlock feels permanent because neither owner can outvote the other, and the operating agreement you signed years ago never planned for the day the trust ran out. Here is what the paralysis hides. Illinois does not leave feuding owners stuck. The Business Corporation Act, the Limited Liability Company Act, and the partnership statute each hand a judge real power to break the logjam, remove an owner who is abusing the company, and set a fair price on the way out. The owner who understands
those tools negotiates from strength. The owner who does not usually takes the first number the other side offers.

Continue reading ›

The complaint arrives styled as a class action, and the number at the bottom of the page is built to frighten you. A single fee, a single line in a form contract, or a single advertisement, multiplied across every customer you have served for years, until the demand looks large enough to swallow the company. The plaintiff’s lawyer wants you to see that number and reach for the checkbook before anyone asks the harder question. Can this case be a class action at all?

Most consumer fraud class actions are won or lost at class certification, the stage where the court decides whether one named plaintiff may sue on behalf of thousands. Illinois law gives a defendant real tools to defeat certification, and the strongest of them rests on one idea. A consumer fraud claim requires that each plaintiff was actually deceived, and deception rarely reaches thousands of people the same way.

Continue reading ›

By Peter S. Lubin and James V. DiTommaso

You own half of a company you helped build, and the other owner has turned on you. The distributions stopped, but the salary he pays himself did not. You asked to see the books and got silence. Maybe he changed the password on the shared drive, put his brother-in-law on payroll, or started a side venture that looks a great deal like yours. You do not know whether you are about to lose the business, your investment, or both, and every day you wait feels like a day he is using against you.

When owners go to war, the winner is usually the one who moves first and moves correctly. This is a plain guide to what an Illinois commercial litigator actually does to protect an owner in a partner dispute, in the order the work usually happens, so you know what to ask for and what to expect. The law gives you more leverage than the other side wants you to realize.

Continue reading ›

By Peter S. Lubin and James V. DiTommaso

A process server hands your company a class action complaint late on a Friday. By Monday you are reading a theory that turns one disputed
charge or one form document into a claim brought on behalf of thousands of people. The instinct is to wait, to answer the complaint, and to see how bad it gets. That instinct is a mistake. What a defendant does in the first thirty days often decides the case, because the early choices
about where the lawsuit is heard and whether the plaintiff can clear the threshold hurdles shape everything that follows.

This is a plain guide to the opening moves that protect a business sued in a putative class action, from removal to federal court through
the standing defenses that can end the case before a class is ever certified.

Continue reading ›

You and your partner built this together, fifty-fifty, on a handshake and a shared idea of where the company was going. The split worked until it didn’t. Now you disagree about everything that matters, the strategy, the money, whether to sell, and neither of you can outvote the other. Decisions stall. Good employees notice. The company that took years to build is freezing in place while the two of you stare across the table, each certain the other is the problem.

A deadlock feels like a trap because the thing that made the partnership fair, equal ownership, is now the thing that paralyzes it. Illinois does not leave equal owners stranded. The law gives a deadlocked owner a path out, and it is rarely the mutual destruction each side fears. If you are staring at a 50/50 split that has stopped working, the question is not whether you are stuck. It is which exit serves you best.

What does Illinois consider a corporate deadlock?

Your partner started a second company. You learned about it from a customer, not from him, and now you notice that the easy jobs still come to your shared business while the lucrative ones quietly go to his. He says there is nothing wrong with a little outside work. You suspect he has been competing with the company you own together, using its people and its relationships to do it. The question is whether the law sees a betrayal or just ordinary business.

In Illinois, partners and co-owners are not strangers dealing at arm’s length. They stand in a fiduciary relationship, the most demanding standard the law imposes outside a trust, and conduct that would be unremarkable between competitors can be a breach between partners. Knowing where that line sits tells you whether you have a grievance or a case, and it is just as important if you are the partner being accused.

What does an Illinois business partner owe his partners?

You asked a simple question. Where did the money go? You own a piece of the company, the profits that used to reach you have thinned, and you want to see the financials that would explain why. The controlling owner’s answer is a wall. He tells you the records are confidential, or none of your concern, or available only if you drop your objections first. He is betting that you do not know the law gives you a key to that door.

It does. Illinois grants shareholders and LLC members an enforceable right to inspect the books and records of the company they own, and it backs that right with penalties and fee awards when a company refuses without cause. An inspection demand is often the single most useful first move in a partnership or shareholder dispute, because everything else you might claim depends on the facts those records contain.

What records can an Illinois shareholder demand?

You find it by accident. A vendor mentions a company you have never heard of, and a week of digging shows that your co-owner has been routing the business’s best work through a second entity he owns alone. Or the bank statements show payments to a relative for work no one did. You are furious, and you are ready to sue. Then your lawyer asks a question that changes everything. Is this your claim, or the company’s?

That question is not a technicality. In Illinois, getting it wrong can end a meritorious case before it is heard. Some wrongs done inside a company belong to you personally to sue over. Others belong to the company itself, and you may pursue them only derivatively, by stepping into the company’s shoes after clearing a set of procedural gates. Knowing the difference is the difference between recovering and being dismissed.

Direct or derivative: whose claim is it?

You own thirty percent of the company, and for the first ten years that felt like a partnership. Then the managing member stopped returning your calls. The distributions shrank and then stopped, though the company is plainly doing well. You are no longer copied on decisions. The manager’s salary has grown to a number that happens to absorb most of the profit you used to share. You are still a member on paper, but you have been pushed to the door without anyone touching the lock.

This is a freeze-out, and the Illinois Limited Liability Company Act gives a minority member real remedies for it. The managing member is counting on you believing that whoever controls the company controls your fate. The statute says otherwise. If you are the frozen-out member, the law gives you leverage the manager would rather you never discover.

What counts as oppression of an LLC member in Illinois?

The offer to buy your shares arrives as a single page. You built a quarter of the company over fifteen years, and the letter values your stake at a number that would not cover two good years of the distributions you used to take. The controlling owner calls it generous. His accountant has trimmed it once for your lack of control, trimmed it again because the shares are hard to sell, and used a valuation date that happens to fall right after the worst quarter in the company’s history. The message is that this is the market speaking, and that you should take the number before it falls.

It is not the market speaking. It is a negotiating position dressed up as an appraisal. Illinois does not measure a departing owner’s shares by what a stranger would pay for a powerless slice of a private company. It measures them by fair value, a legal standard with decades of case law behind it, and that standard is usually far kinder to the owner being bought out than the first offer admits. If you are a minority owner staring at a lowball buyout, the law is more on your side than the letter wants you to believe.

What does “fair value” mean for a minority owner in Illinois?

Contact Information