Nadler Pritikin & Mirabelli & Shaun Bersson Chicago Illinois

Complaint: IN THE CIRCUIT COURTOF COOK COUNTY, ILLINOISCOUNTY DEPARTMENT,LAW DIVISIONROBERT SKERTICH, Plaintiff, v. NENRICO MIRABELLI, SHAWN BERSSON And NADLER, PRITIKIN & MIRABELLI, LTD., Defendants. VERIFIED COMPLAINTNOWCOMES the Plaintiff, ROBERT SKERTICH, by and through his attorney, Charles M.Shepherd, and for his Verified Complaint against ENRICO MIRABELLI, SHAWNBERSSON and NADLER, PRITKIN & MIRABELLI, LTD., states as follows:1. Plaintiff is seeking damages against Defendantsfor legal malpractice relating to their representation of Plaintiff in a LawDivision matter and a subsequent appeal which resulted in a substantialjudgment against Plaintiff. 2. Plaintiff ROBERT SKERTICH (Skertich) is acitizen and resident of the County of Cook, State of Illinois.3. Defendant ENRICO MIRABELLI (Mirabelli) is acitizen and resident of the County of Cook, State of Illinois. At all times relevant hereto, Mirabelliwas an attorney licensed to practice law in the State of Illinois. At all times relevant hereto, Mirabelliwas a partner with the law firm of NADLER, PRITKIN & MIRABELLI, LTD. 4. Defendant SHALOM BERSSON (Bersson) is acitizen and resident of the County of Cook, State of Illinois. At all times relevant hereto, Berssonwas an attorney licensed to practice law in the State of Illinois. At all times relevant hereto, Berssonwas a partner with the law firm of NADLER, PRITKIN & MIRABELLI, LTD. 5. Defendant NADLER, PRITKIN & MIRABELLI, LTD.(NPM) is a law firm located in the City of Chicago, County of Cook, State ofIllinois. At its website locatedat www.npmfamlaw.com, NPM holds itself out as a law firmspecializing in the practice of family law.FACTUALBACKGROUND6. Onor about April 10, 1997, ANNE BORKOWSKI (Borkowski) married Skertich.7. Duringthe course of their marriage, Borkowski was a medical doctor in the State ofIllinois. Skertich was aconstruction contractor.8. Priorto living together, Skertich invested in a condominium on LaSalle Street inChicago, Illinois. After marrying,the condominium was sold. Theproceeds on the sale, almost $29,000.00, were used by Skertich and Borkowski asa partial down payment on a townhouse located at 363 B West Superior, Chicago,Illinois 60610.9. Aftermarrying, Borkowski informed Skertich that she wanted to adopt children. Both Borkowski and Skertich filled outpaperwork to adopt two children from Russia. Prior to, and on or about May, 2003, Borkowski preparedpaperwork which lauded Skertich and their marriage. 10. On or about May 13, 2003, Borkowski filed apetition to divorce Skertich in the Circuit Court of Cook County,Illinois. (Borkowski v. Skertich, Case No. 2003 D 5260).11. On or about July, 2003, an attorney-clientrelationship was created between Skertich and Mirabelli, Bersson and NPM. Skertich was not provided with asigned, written Attorney-Client Agreement. However, Mirabelli, Bersson and NPM acted as Skertichsattorney during the divorce.12. Borkowskis divorce attorney represented toMirabelli that Borkowski would never provide any settlement or money toSkertich unless a judge ordered her to do it. 13. On or about August 22, 2003, Borkowski filed alawsuit (the Lawsuit) against Skertich in the Law Division of the CircuitCourt of Cook County, Illinois. (See Exhibit A). Although the events alleged in thecomplaint occurred during the marriage, Borkowski filed the lawsuit separatefrom the divorce action.14. Borkowskisought damages against Skertich under three theories of liability Count I wasfor Battery and Count II was for intentional infliction of emotional distressand Count III was for ______________________. 15. On March 4, 2004, an attorney-clientrelationship was created between Skertich and Mirabelli, Bersson and NPM. Skertich was not provided with a signed,written Attorney-Client Agreement. However, Mirabelli, Bersson and NPM acted as Skertichs attorney duringthe Lawsuit. 16. On March 4, 2004, Mirabelli, Bersson and NPMfiled an appearance in the Circuit Court of Cook County on behalf of Skertichin the Lawsuit.17. In the Lawsuit, Borkowski alleged that duringthe course of their marriage, she was the victim of domestic abuse by Skertich.18. On January 31, 2005, Mirabelli, Bersson and NPMfiled a demand for bill of particulars. A copy was not provided to Skertich nor was Skertich informed what wasfiled in response to the demand. 19. Borkowski alleged a number of incidents which allegedlysupported her claims in the Lawsuit. These incidents include:a. Borkowski allegedthat on September 1, 2001, Skertich got angry, grabbed Borkowskis brother,dragged him down concrete steps and threw him out of the house. Bob also threw Borkowski down the stepsand broke her rib.b. Borkowski allegedthat on September 21, 2001, Skertich grabbed Borkowski and punched her in thearm during a fight about money.c. Borkowski allegedthat on October 5, 2001, Skertich yelled at Borkowski about money, grabbed herrobe and shoved her.d. Borkowski allegedthat on November 25, 2001, during a fight about money, Skertich punchedBorkowski in the nose and pushed her off the bed in their bedroom.e. Borkowski allegedthat between May, 2002 and December, 2002, Borkowski and Skertich had many argumentsover money.f. Borkowski allegedthat on December 31, 2002, Borkowski and Skertich got into an argument overmoney and Skertich threw money across the floor, pushed papers off the kitchencounter, threw a bottle of milk at the window and threw cat food.g. Borkowski allegedthat on May 1, 2003, Borkowski and Skertich fought over money, Skertichscreamed and threatened to sleep with someone else, threatened to light Borkowskiscoat on fire and Skertich. 20. Borkowski alleged that the motive for Skertichsactions was that he never worked, never made money and never contributed to thehousehold.21. Between November 14, 2006 and November 17,2006, the lawsuit was tried before a twelve person jury in the law Division ofthe Circuit Court of Cook County, Illinois.22. OnNovember 16, 2006, while the case was pending, Borkowski filed a first amendedcomplaint. Count I alleged batteryfrom the November 25, 2001 incident and requested a judgment in excess of$50,000, including punitive damages, costs and other equitable relief. Count II alleged intentional inflictionof emotional distress from the incidents alleged to have occurred from September1, 2001 through July 9, 2003.23. Mirabelli,Bersson and NPM opposed the motion to amend and argued that they had notconducted discovery, prepared for trial or conducted trial with the possibilitythat punitive damages would be awarded. 24. OnNovember 17, 2006, the jury returned a verdict in favor of Borkowski andagainst Skertich in the amount of $657,098.07 on the battery count and $243,500on the intentional infliction of emotional distress.25. On___________, Mirabelli, Bersson and NPM filed a Notice of Appeal on behalf ofSkertich with the Illinois Appellate Court, First District (Case No. 07-1472).26. OnOctober 22, 2007, the Record on Appeal was prepared and filed in the Appellatematter. The Record was incompleteand Mirabelli, Bersson and NPM purposefully failed to include all of thetranscripts with the Record. 27. OnJanuary 25, 2008, Mirabelli, Bersson and NPM prepared and filed Brief andArgument of the Defendant/AppellantRobert J. Skertich. On July 28, 2008, Borkowski filed herResponse Brief. On August 22,2008, Skertich filed his reply Brief.28. Inits argument on appeal, Mirabelli, Bersson and NPM did raise any issues withrespect to the representation Skertich received at trial. Mirabelli, Bersson and NPM did admitthat they were unprepared for the possibility of punitive damages and wereunprepared to proceed with any claim relating to punitive damages.29. On__________, the Appeal of Skertich was denied.COUNT ILEGALMALPRACTICE 30. Plaintiff realleges and reincorporatesparagraphs 1 through 29 as if fully set forth herein.31. At all times relevant hereto, anattorney-client relationship existed between Skertich and Bersson, Mirabelliand NPM.32. At all times relevant hereto, Mirabelli,Bersson and NPM owed Skertich a duty to exercise a reasonable degree of careand professional responsibility.33. Mirabelli,Bersson and NPM breached the duty owed to Skertich. Mirabelli, Bersson and NPM acted unreasonably as follows:a. During the discoveryphase of the Lawsuit, failed to attempt or obtain the adoption records whichwould have undermined the credibility of Borkowski, impeached Borkowski andwould have demonstrated that Borkowski made prior inconsistent statements aboutSkertich; b. Duringthe discovery phase of the Lawsuit, failed to consult or retain an expertwitness to address the alleged fractured ribs and fractured nose (none of whichwere supported by visits to a hospital).c. Duringthe discovery phase and trial phase of the Lawsuit, failed to adequatelyprepare for a request for or an award of punitive damages, as admitted in itsargument on appeal.d. Duringthe discovery phase of the Lawsuit, failed to obtain the records relating tothe money Skertich put into the Superior townhouse, thus undermining theallegation that Skertich never contributed anything to the household; e. Duringthe discovery phase of the Lawsuit, failed to make adequate inquiries about thealleged financial records of Borkowski, including the hiring of a forensicaccountant, to address the allegations that Borkowski provided Skertich largeamounts of cash.f. Duringthe discovery phase of the Lawsuit, failed to attempt to, or obtain, medicalrecords relating to the injuries allegedly suffered by Borkowski andBorkowskis brother.g. Inthe appeal, failed to address the failure of the trial counsel to adequatelyprepare for the trial of this matter;h. Knowinglymaking false statements to the appellate court and falsely telling Skertichthat Mirabelli, Bersson and NPM had hired a private investigator to find thecourt reporter who transcribed the trial of this matter.i. Duringthe discovery phase of this matter, failed to obtain marriage counselor recordsand records relating to Skertichs medical issues.j. Duringthe discovery phase of the Lawsuit, failed to obtain and review records showingthe construction projects on which Skertich worked, showing that he had anincome for this period of time.k. Duringthe discovery phase of this Lawsuit, failed to obtain and review recordsrelating to prescriptions written by Borkowski for Skertich;l. Duringthe discovery phase of the lawsuit, refused to hire a private investigator toinvestigate claims that Borkowski had made prior false abuse allegations withprior boyfriends.m. Duringthe trial of the Lawsuit, argued that Skertich was a martial arts expert whowhen in fact he was not.34. But for the unreasonable and outrageous conductof Mirabelli, Bersson and NPM, Skertich would not have been found liable at thetrial of the Lawsuit. In addition,but for the unreasonable and outrageous conduct of Mirabelli, Bersson and NPM,damages (including punitive damages) would not have been awarded or would nothave been awarded in the amount set at trial.35. Asa result of the unreasonable and outrageous conduct of Mirabelli, Bersson andNPM, Skertich has been damaged.WHEREFORE, Plaintiff ROBERT SKERTICHprays for an award of all damages available at law in excess of $50,000.00, anaward of punitive damages, all costs and any additional relief this Court deemsappropriate.COUNT IIINTENTIONALINFLICTION OF EMOTIONAL DISTRESS 36. Plaintiff realleges and reincorporatesparagraphs 1 through 35 as if fully set forth herein.37. As outlined herein, Mirabelli, Bersson and NPM engagedin outrageous and extreme conduct that goes beyond the bounds of common humandecency. Skertich trustedMirabelli, Bersson and NPM to protect his interests and to provide a defense tothe lawsuit.38. Theoutrageous conduct of Mirabelli, Bersson and NPM has caused Skertichsignificant emotional harm, including depression, inability to sleep, loss ofappetite and feelings of hopelessness. 39. Skertichhas essentially been saddled with almost $1 million in debt because hisattorneys failed to do their job.WHEREFORE, Plaintiff ROBERT SKERTICHprays for an award of all damages available at law in excess of $50,000.00,court costs and any additional relief this Court deems appropriate. RespectfullySubmitted ROBERT SKERTICH By:__________________________ Oneof His AttorneysMr. Charles M. ShepherdAttorney for Plaintiff15 Spinning wheel Road, Suite 210Hinsdale, Illinois 60521(630) 908-3077 VERIFICATION Underpenalties of perjury provided by law pursuant to Section 1-109 of the Code ofCivil Procedure, the undersigned hereby certifies that the statements set forthin Plaintiffs Verified Complaint are true and correct except as to matterstherein stated to be on information and belief and as to such matters, theundersigned certifies as aforesaid that he verily believes the same to be true. _______________________________Robert Skertich _______________________________Date

Tags: Lawyers

Address: Prudential Plaza Chicago, Illinois United States of America

Website: npmfamlaw.com/

Phone: 1312-861-4600

Share Review:
Yes it is. Based on the user review published on YScam.com, it is strongly advised to avoid Nadler Pritikin & Mirabelli & Shaun Bersson Chicago Illinois in any dealing and transaction.
Not really. In spite of the review published here, there has been no response from Nadler Pritikin & Mirabelli & Shaun Bersson Chicago Illinois. Lack of accountability is a major factor in determining trust.
Because unlike YScam.com, other websites get paid to remove negative reviews and replace them with fake positive ones.
Nadler Pritikin & Mirabelli & Shaun Bersson Chicago Illinois is rated 1 out of 5 based on the complaints submitted by our users and is marked as POOR.
Never trust websites which offer a shady ‘advocacy package’ to businesses. Search for relevant reviews on Ripoff Report and Pissed Consumer to see more unbiased complaints.
The above complaints and comments against Nadler Pritikin & Mirabelli & Shaun Bersson Chicago Illinois were submitted by YScam.com user(s) and have been published as-is. YScam.com does not edit, alter or remove content published by it’s users. There’s no amount of money a business can pay to manipulate their complaints and YScam.com will NOT entertain any request to remove the complaint on Nadler Pritikin & Mirabelli & Shaun Bersson Chicago Illinois at any cost whatsoever.
>