Featured Cases

Poor, et al. v. Sprint, et al. (Madison County, Illinois)

The plaintiffs are owners of land traversed by railroad rights-of-way, within which Sprint has installed fiber optic cable for use in its nationwide telecommunications network. The plaintiffs allege that Sprint installed the cable throughout the country without obtaining the permission of the landowners and that the installation constitutes a trespass. Plaintiffs requested certification of a class of landowners nationwide and state court Judge Phillip J. Kardis agreed that certification is proper and entered an order naming the plaintiffs as class representatives and Zelle Hofmann and their co-counsel as class counsel.

Sprint argued that the case could not be managed as a class action, because the number of aggrieved landowners is so great the Court will be unable to adjudicate their claims. Judge Kardis rejected that argument, writing that the Illinois Constitution “states a strong public policy that it is the duty of each judge in this state to do his or her best to fashion a system to allow every person at least an opportunity to pursue a remedy for alleged injuries to his property.” Judge Kardis further noted, as Zelle Hofmann had argued, that Sprint cannot escape justice simply because the magnitude of its wrongful conduct created a complex legal problem:

Assuming that Plaintiff’s allegations are correct, can the judicial system of this country allow an alleged wrongdoer to keep as much as 500 HUNDRED MILLION DOLLARS that legally belongs to others just because they are 200,000 strong and not one single individual. The Courts cannot turn their collective backs on this situation. Let us not be naïve, without class action, there is no potential remedy. This Court will not turn its back, indeed, it is constitutionally mandated not to.

© 2008 Zelle Hofmann/ Not Certified by the Texas Board of Legal Specialization
Site Map / Disclaimer / Search / Site by Firmseek