Gherasim and Lidia Stoia v. Cornelia and Daniel Cusniriuc

Chicago, Illinois civil litigation lawyers represented that parties in a condo la dispute.



Defendants and plaintiffs live in a two-unit condominium building in Lincolnwood, Illinois. Plaintiffs own Unit One, which consists of the first floor and the basement, and defendants own Unit Two, which consists of the second floor. The mechanical equipment for defendants' Unit Two, which includes the furnace, hot water heater, and electrical boxes, is located in the basement of plaintiffs' Unit One. This court previously affirmed the circuit court's declaratory judgment finding that defendants, as owners of Unit Two, "had an implied easement by preexisting use to install and access their mechanical equipment in the basement" of plaintiffs' unit. Cusniriuc v. Stoia, 2022 IL App (1st) 200495-U, ¶ 2.



* * *



CONTRACT LAW. SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT ENFORCEMENT. The case concerns the enforcement of a settlement agreement and addresses whether the circuit court properly enforced the agreement despite claims of lack of meeting of the minds on essential terms, the absence of a formal written agreement, and additional terms asserted by the defendants.



CONTRACT LAW. JURISDICTION AND SETTLEMENT AGREEMENTS. The court examines the jurisdiction to enforce a settlement agreement post-dismissal, confirming that the trial court retained jurisdiction as explicitly stated in the dismissal order to enforce the terms of the settlement.



CONTRACT LAW. DOCTRINE OF FRUSTRATION. The appeal tackles the application of the doctrine of frustration, discussing whether unforeseen costs associated with the settlement terms could excuse performance, ultimately finding the argument waived as it was not raised in the lower court.



Key Phrases Pretrial settlement conference. Implied easement by preexisting use. Meeting of the minds. Condition precedent. Doctrine of frustration.

Affirmed