Four Decades of Chicago Injury Work: What That Experience Actually Buys You
When you’re searching for a Chicago personal injury lawyer after a serious crash or a fall on someone else’s property, "over 40 years of injury law experience" should mean something concrete. At McDevitt and Cobb P.C., that longevity translates into a documented history of handling motor vehicle accident and premises liability claims across Chicago and Cook County, familiarity with Illinois comparative fault rules, and a practice built around personal injury and wrongful death matters. This guide explains both the governing law and the experience the firm brings to it.
If you’re weighing your options right now, a conversation costs you nothing but time. Learn more about McDevitt and Cobb P.C., call 312-332-0072, or reach out online to start a free case evaluation.
Why Longevity Matters More in Injury Law Than in Almost Any Other Practice
Experience matters in injury litigation because the rules deciding these cases are fact-sensitive, statutory, and unforgiving of procedural missteps. Illinois personal injury claims are governed by a layered framework of statutes, court rules, and appellate decisions; readers can review the Illinois Compiled Statutes directly. A lawyer who has worked within that framework for four decades has generally seen how insurers value claims, how defense counsel attacks causation, and how Cook County juries respond to particular evidence.
McDevitt and Cobb P.C. states it has recovered more than $150 million for clients over a 40-plus year track record. Past results depend entirely on the facts of each case and do not predict or guarantee any future outcome. Still, a sustained record of resolving claims both in and outside the courtroom signals a firm can litigate when negotiation stalls rather than accepting whatever an adjuster offers.
💡 Pro Tip: Before you hire anyone, independently confirm an attorney’s standing through the IARDC lawyer search, the official Illinois portal for registration status, admission date, and disciplinary history.
What Decades of Motor Vehicle Work Looks Like in Practice
Motor vehicle cases in Chicago rarely turn on a single police report. The firm handles car, truck and tractor-trailer, motorcycle, pedestrian, and bicycle collisions resulting in serious injury, along with rideshare claims and dram shop actions against establishments that unlawfully served an intoxicated person, permitted under the Liquor Control Act only within statutory damage caps and a one-year filing deadline. Each category carries its own evidentiary demands, from electronic control module data in trucking cases to app status records in rideshare claims.
Rideshare coverage illustrates why the category matters. Under 625 ILCS 57, while a driver is logged into a transportation network company app but hasn’t accepted a ride request, the driver and company must generally maintain at least $50,000 per person and $100,000 per incident in liability coverage, plus $25,000 for property damage; once a ride is accepted, at least $1,000,000 in combined coverage generally applies. Which coverage layer applies can depend on the driver’s app status at impact, a detail often disputed and materially affecting compensation. Drivers may find it useful to review what Illinois drivers should know before filing an MVA claim.
Published past results from the firm reflect this range of collision work. Reported settlements include $15,125,000 for a motorcycle rider who suffered incomplete paraplegia in a construction zone accident, $1,750,000 for a man who sustained a severe leg fracture when his vehicle was t-boned at an intersection, and $1,495,000 for a woman who suffered orthopedic injuries in a rideshare accident. These are past results only; every case is decided on its own facts, and similar outcomes cannot be promised.
What Decades of Premises Liability Work Looks Like in Practice
Illinois premises liability begins with a duty question many injured people misunderstand. Under the Premises Liability Act, 740 ILCS 130, the common-law distinction between invitees and licensees has been abolished, and lawful entrants are generally owed reasonable care under the circumstances. That single standard is the doctrinal core of most Chicago slip-and-fall claims.
That duty has real limits, and an honest evaluation acknowledges them. Illinois courts apply the open and obvious doctrine, under which a possessor of land ordinarily owes no duty to warn of hazards so obvious an entrant would reasonably discover and appreciate them. Adult trespassers are generally owed only a duty to refrain from willful and wanton conduct once their presence is known, which frequently matters on vacant lots, parking structures, and construction sites in Cook County. Whether a hazard was truly open and obvious is often contested, and courts recognize distraction and deliberate-encounter exceptions that can restore a duty.
Lease language is another area where injured tenants and guests are often misled. Under 765 ILCS 705/1, a covenant exempting a lessor from liability for injuries caused by the lessor’s own negligence in operating or maintaining the premises is generally void as against public policy, though courts read the statute according to its terms. Often, fine print an insurer points to simply doesn’t bar the claim. The firm’s Chicago premises liability attorneys handle injuries from negligent maintenance, operation, or design, as well as negligent security claims.
Reported premises results include several substantial settlements. Among them: $1,700,000 for a man who suffered a complex wrist ligament and tendon injury when a painted-shut apartment window shattered while being opened, $1,000,000 for a delivery worker who sustained chemical burns to the eye with impaired vision, and $800,000 for a high school student assaulted on school grounds. Again, these reflect past matters and their individual facts.
💡 Pro Tip: Photograph the hazard the same day if you safely can, including lighting, signage, and surrounding area. Conditions on Chicago properties change quickly, and contemporaneous images are often the strongest evidence available months later.
How Comparative Fault Can Reduce or Eliminate Recovery
Illinois applies modified comparative fault, which can diminish or bar recovery entirely. Under Section 2-1116 of the Code of Civil Procedure, a plaintiff whose contributory fault exceeds 50% of the proximate cause is barred from recovering; below that threshold, damages are reduced in proportion to fault. In a wrongful death action, the decedent’s contributory fault is assessed first; under the Wrongful Death Act, 740 ILCS 180, each beneficiary’s own fault is then assessed separately, and a beneficiary found more than 50% responsible is barred from recovering.
This is precisely where defense strategy concentrates. Insurers routinely build arguments assigning fault to the injured person, because every percentage point reduces exposure. Countering that requires accident reconstruction, witness development, medical documentation, and economic loss analysis assembled early, before positions harden.
Common evidence categories influencing fault allocation include:
- Scene photographs, roadway measurements, and vehicle damage patterns
- Independent witness statements taken before memories fade
- Medical records tying each diagnosis to the mechanism of injury
- Employment and wage documentation establishing economic loss
- Maintenance, inspection, or repair records in property cases
Building a Personal Injury Life Care Plan for Catastrophic Injuries
A personal injury life care plan projects the future medical, vocational, and support costs a catastrophically injured person is likely to face. In cases involving paraplegia, traumatic brain injury, or permanent loss of function in a dominant limb, present medical bills capture only a fraction of the true loss. Life care planning documents anticipated surgeries, assistive equipment, home modification, attendant care, and lost earning capacity so those items can be presented as recoverable damages, subject to the usual requirement that future damages be established by competent, non-speculative evidence.
Not every claim requires one, and the firm’s approach begins with understanding the client’s situation before building a strategy. McDevitt and Cobb P.C. describes a three-step process of learning about the client’s circumstances, creating a tailored strategy, and pursuing the best available resolution, with the goal of handling every aspect of the claim so the client can focus on health and recovery. Whether a life care plan is appropriate depends on injury severity, prognosis, and the damages actually in dispute.
💡 Pro Tip: Keep a dated symptom and treatment journal from the first week forward. Even minor injuries deserve documented care; gaps in early treatment give insurers an argument that the injury wasn’t serious.
Why You Should Choose McDevitt and Cobb P.C.
The firm identifies itself as a Chicago personal injury law firm with over 40 years of injury law experience, focused on personal injury and wrongful death matters. Clients receive direct access to responsive attorneys, and the firm’s lawyers have experience resolving claims both through negotiation and litigation. Daniel J. McDevitt is the firm’s founding partner, and the practice emphasizes personal attention, compassion, and integrity.
Fit matters as much as credentials. The firm represents injured people and families, not insurers or property owners, and its published results span motorcycle, intersection, rideshare, apartment-condition, premises hazard, and negligent security claims. Outcomes always depend on the specific facts, evidence, and applicable law in your matter.
💡 Pro Tip: Ask any firm you consult who will actually handle your file day to day and how often you’ll hear from them. Responsiveness is one of the few service qualities you can evaluate before you sign anything.
Frequently Asked Questions
Common Questions About Motor Vehicle Accidents and Premises Liability in Chicago, Illinois
1. Does partial fault prevent me from recovering anything?
Not necessarily. Illinois modified comparative fault reduces recovery in proportion to the injured person’s share of responsibility, but a plaintiff found more than 50% at fault is barred entirely. Because fault allocation is fact-intensive, an early evaluation of the evidence is usually worthwhile.
2. Can a lease clause block my injury claim against a landlord?
Generally no. Illinois law voids lease covenants attempting to exempt a lessor from liability for injuries resulting from the lessor’s own negligence in operating or maintaining the property. Exceptions can still arise, so the actual lease language should be reviewed.
3. What if the hazard that injured me was visible?
Visibility doesn’t automatically end a claim. The open and obvious doctrine can limit a property owner’s duty, but Illinois courts recognize exceptions, including distraction and deliberate encounter, and its application is frequently disputed depending on the facts.
4. Are deadlines for filing an injury claim ever extended?
In limited circumstances. Most Illinois personal injury actions must be filed within two years, and wrongful death claims generally within two years of death, though tolling for minors and discovery-based accrual can affect when the clock runs. Courts interpret these exceptions narrowly, and civil limitations periods are distinct from claims against government entities or dram shop actions, which carry shorter deadlines, so timing should be confirmed promptly.
5. How is a rideshare claim different from an ordinary car accident claim?
Coverage depends heavily on the driver’s app status at the time of the crash, with lower minimum liability limits applying before a ride request is accepted and substantially higher limits during a prearranged ride. Establishing that status often requires records from the transportation network company, which is why these claims benefit from early preservation efforts.
Making a Confident Decision After a Serious Injury
Choosing counsel after a collision or a fall is a decision about evidence, judgment, and staying power. Illinois law gives injured people meaningful rights under the Premises Liability Act, the Wrongful Death Act, and the state’s transportation network company insurance requirements, but those rights are bounded by comparative fault rules, duty limitations, and filing deadlines that reward early, disciplined case development. A firm with over four decades of injury law experience and a published record of resolving serious motor vehicle and premises cases brings context to those decisions that newer practices may not yet have accumulated.
Your next step can be a simple conversation about what happened. Learn more about the attorneys at McDevitt and Cobb P.C., call 312-332-0072, or schedule your free consultation to discuss your Chicago injury claim today.
Disclaimer: This content is for informational purposes only and is not legal advice. Every case is unique, and results may vary. Consult an attorney about your specific circumstances.
