Susan Theis v. Flowers Baking Co. of Lenexa, LLC

Granite City, Illinois personal injury lawyer represented the Plaintiff on a negligence claims.



This case was filed in the Circuit County, Madison County, Illinois, 2025LA168, and was removed to federal court by the Defendant.



* * *



In Illinois, a negligence claim requires proving four elements: duty, breach, causation, and damages. Duty refers to the legal obligation a person has to act with reasonable care towards others. Breach occurs when someone fails to meet that duty of care. Causation means the breach of duty directly caused the injury, and damages refers to the actual harm or loss suffered. Illinois also follows a modified comparative negligence rule, meaning a plaintiff's damages can be reduced if they are partially at fault, but they are barred from recovery if their fault exceeds 50%.

Here's a more detailed breakdown:



1. Duty: A person must owe a legal duty of care to the injured party. This duty can arise from various relationships, such as driver to driver, property owner to visitor, or doctor to patient.



2. Breach: The defendant must have failed to act as a reasonably careful person would in similar circumstances. This could involve speeding, failing to maintain a safe premises, or medical malpractice.



3. Causation: The breach of duty must be the direct cause of the injury. This includes both "cause in fact" (but for the breach, the injury would not have occurred) and "proximate cause" (the injury was a foreseeable result of the breach).



4. Damages: The plaintiff must have suffered actual harm or loss, such as physical injury, property damage, or financial loss.



Modified Comparative Negligence:



Illinois law reduces damages proportionally to the plaintiff's fault, but only if the plaintiff's fault is 50% or less. If the plaintiff's fault is greater than 50%, they are barred from recovering any damages. This is in contrast to "pure" comparative negligence, where a plaintiff can recover even if they are mostly at fault.

The Plaintiff filed a motion to remand the case based on lack of jurisdiction.