Menu
Profile
Representative Matters
Presentations

Marcos Reilly has practiced in the field of commercial litigation since 1986, primarily at the trial level in Illinois Circuit Courts, the U.S. District Court and the U.S. Bankruptcy Court, but also on appeal in the U.S. Courts of Appeals and the Illinois Appellate Court. He has litigated in administrative forums such as hospital medical staff proceedings as well. Additionally, Mr. Reilly handles some non-litigation work, including reviewing and drafting contracts and advising clients in connection with intellectual property, corporate governance, employment and other matters.

Mr. Reilly’s areas of focus include intellectual property litigation, employment-related litigation, especially involving non-compete agreements and trade secrets, shareholder litigation and corporate disputes, health care-related litigation, including hospital medical staff disputes, construction litigation, contract litigation of all kinds and fraud, unfair competition and other business torts. A considerable portion of his litigation practice has focused on proceedings for injunctive relief and other equitable remedies.

Professional Background

Mr. Reilly joined Hinshaw & Culbertson LLP in June 1989.

Professional Affiliations

  • Leading Lawyers Network

Honors & Awards

  • Selected by his peers as a Leading Lawyer in the area of Commercial Litigation, Leading Lawyers Network
  • Rated by Martindale-Hubbell for ethics and legal ability

Representative Matters

Mr. Reilly’s clients include banks, hospitals, manufacturers and a wide range of midsize and small businesses, particularly professional corporations and partnerships in fields such as medicine, dentistry, accounting, and architecture/engineering.

Cases representative of his professional experience include:

  • Bobak Sausage Co. v. Bobak Orland Park, Inc., 2007 WL 4302964 (N.D. Ill. 2007); 2007 WL 846505, (N.D. Ill. 2007). U.S. District Court, Northern District of Illinois. Prosecuted trademark infringement suit for prominent Chicago-area food manufacturer and wholesaler, negotiated favorable settlement, successfully prosecuted two contempt-of-court motions after defendants violated stipulated injunction order. (See also “Lawsuit Over Sausage Cuts Family Links at Plant, Stores; Bobak Brothers Sever Ties; Ruling Sets Limits on Wholesale Operation,”Chicago Tribune, November 11, 2006).
  • Fabrizio v. Provena United Samaritans Medical Center, 221 Ill.2d 634 (Table; Ill. S.Ct. 2006). Circuit Court for the Fifth Judicial Circuit, Vermilion County, Illinois and Illinois Appellate Court for the Fourth District. Defended declaratory judgment action by officers of hospital medical staff contending that medical staff bylaws constituted a contract under Illinois law and that therefore the hospital had no authority to set minimum professional liability insurance requirements without the medical staff’s agreement.  Obtained reversal on appeal of trial court judgment in favor of plaintiffs; Illinois Supreme Court declined further review. (See also “Court Rules Hospital Not Bound by Bylaws,” www.amednews.com, June 26, 2006).
  • Pope v. Harvard Bancshares, Inc., 240 F.R.D. 383 (N.D. Ill., 2006). U.S. District Court, Northern District of Illinois. Defended class action by shareholders of a bank holding company protesting a “squeeze-out merger” conducted to qualify for Subchapter S treatment and disputing the value placed on the stock for the forced sale. Favorable settlement after disqualifying first proposed class representative and filing summary judgment motion.
  • Bradarich v. Corus Bank, N.A., 2005 WL 1763761 (Ill.App. 2005). Circuit Court of Cook County, Illinois and Illinois Appellate Court for the First District. Defended bank against claim by commercial loan customer that charging fees for services of in-house counsel in connection with foreclosure and workout was fraudulent because counsel was paid a salary rather than an hourly rate, and this practice constituted the “unauthorized practice of law.” Obtained dismissal based on the “market value” rule for legal charges and persuaded the court that there is no private right of action for “unauthorized practice of law,” nor is it the unauthorized practice of law for a corporation to employ a licensed attorney. Defeated class certification by obtaining this ruling on the merits of the “representative claim. Affirmed on appeal.
  • Processing Technologies, Inc. v. Jalili, 356 Ill.App.3d 1139, 889 N.E.2d 813 (Table) ( Ill.App. 2005.) Circuit Court for the Sixteenth Judicial Circuit, Kane County, Illinois and Illinois Appellate Court for the Second District. Defended action by manufacturer of plastics production machinery against a former sales manager for misappropriation of trade secrets, breach of fiduciary duty and breach of noncompete agreement; Obtained dismissal of noncompete claim and summary judgment on trade secrets claim, defeated multiple attempts at injunction, and obtained reversal on appeal of a large proportion of a damages award for breach of fiduciary duty.
  • Sornberger v. First Midwest Bank, 278 F.Supp.2d 935 (C.D. Ill. 2002). U.S. District Court, Central District of Illinois. Defended bank sued by customer wrongly identified as a bank robber based on police misinterpretation of bank employee’s statements, charged and held without bond for protracted period, but ultimately exonerated. Obtained dismissal of the claim against the bank.
  • Chen v. Mayflower Transit, Inc., 159 F.Supp.2d 1112 (N.D. Ill. 2001), 315 F.Supp.2d 886 (N.D Ill., 2004); 224 F.R.D. 415 (N.D. Ill. 2004), Cook County Jury Verdict Reporter, Issue 19, Volume WW, Case No. 5, published February 18, 2005. U.S. District Court, Northern District of Illinois. Defended consumer action against a moving company in which the attorney-plaintiff augmented her Carmack Amendment claim with intentional infliction of emotional distress and other state law theories, then escalated into a RICO claim making global fraud accusations against the mover and its estimating and claims-settlement practices. Obtained jury verdict of “not guilty” on the RICO claims, with a nominal award for breach of contract. Settled remaining claims on favorable terms thereafter. (See also “National Mover Faces RICO Suit,” National Law Journal, April 19, 2004).
  • Hays v. General Electric Co., 151 F.Supp.2d 1001, 45 UCC Rep.Serv.2d 449, (N.D. Ill. 2001). U.S. District Court, Northern District of Illinois. Defended $200 million UCC breach of warranties claim by purchaser of DC motors for inclusion in treadmills designed for home use after series of fires and Consumer Product Safety Commission recall. The primary issue was whether the component manufacturer, by providing engineering support to the customer, had effectively designed the customer’s product. Settled on favorable terms with former plaintiff’s bankruptcy trustee after summary judgment filing.
  • In Re Dec/Glenn R. Heyman, Trustee v. William Dec, Francis Ward Allred, and American National Bank, 272 B.R. 218 (Bkrtcy. N.D. Ill. 2001), 2000 WL 1346685 (Bkrtcy. N.D. Ill. 2000). U.S. Bankruptcy Court, Northern District of Illinois. Defended fraudulent conveyance action brought by bankruptcy trustee over the purchase of a mansion from the debtor, reached favorable settlement after trustee’s motion to strike affirmative defenses (includes laches and statute of limitations) was denied and summary judgment was denied.
  • Future Technology Today, Inc. v. OSF Healthcare Systems, 218 F.3d 1247, 13 Fla. L. Weekly Fed. C 855, (11th Cir. 2000). U.S. District Court, Southern District of Florida and U.S. Court of Appeals, Eleventh Circuit. Successfully defended suit by “Y2K” remedial consultant against an Illinois hospital filed in the plaintiff’s home state (Florida) on jurisdictional grounds, defeating the argument that Internet contact makes physical location irrelevant for constitutional and jurisdictional purposes.
  • Gupta v. St. Margaret Mercy Healthcare Centers, Inc., not reported in F.Supp., 1998 WL 34360626 (N.D. Ind. 1998). Defended antitrust and racketeering suit by a competing medical services corporation against a hospital, and obtained summary judgment and a sanctions order against plaintiff.
  • County of DuPage v. Hellmuth, Obata & Kassabaum, Inc., 1996 WL 33413358, (Ill.App. 1996); Wendt v. Hellmuth, Obata & Kassabaum, Inc., 1998 WL 34080936 (Ill.App. 1998). Represented architects/engineers in ‘sick building’ claim by building owner and large group of employee/occupants. Jury found against owner, successfully defended result on appeal. Favorable settlement with employees followed.
  • Manhattan National Life Insurance Co. v. Cash Equivalent Clearing Corp., (1997). Circuit Court of Cook County, Illinois. Obtained mandatory preliminary injunction on behalf of life insurance company to prevent creator of custom database from cutting off access in retaliation for insurer’s refusal to pay additional charges.
  • Bank of Joliet v. Firstar Bank Milwaukee, N.A., 1997 WL 619875 (N.D. Ill. 1997). U.S. District, Northern District of Illinois. Prosecuted claim for wrongful dishonor of letter of credit issued to back an indemnification agreement entered into as part of a bank acquisition. The issuing bank had reversed its payment and withdrawn the funds from the plaintiff’ account after learning the underlying indemnity was for attorneys’ fees and sanctions imposed in bankruptcy litigation. Defeated purported defenses of “fraud” and “violation of public policy” and obtained summary judgment.
  • Gordon v. United Van Lines, Inc., 130 F.3d 282, Fed. Carr. Cas. P 84,057, (7th Cir. 1997). U.S. District Court, Northern District of Illinois and U.S. Court of Appeals, Seventh Circuit. Defended substantial Carmack Amendment and state law claim at trial and on appeal. Influential decision regarding the preemptive effect of the Carmack Amendment on state law remedies. Settled on favorable terms after dismissal of some state law claims in the District Court and disposition of others by the Court of Appeals.
  • Rite-Hite Corp. v. Kelley Co., Inc., 774 F. Supp. 1514, 56 F.3d 1538, 35 U.S.P.Q.2d 1065, (Fed.Cir. 1995). U.S. District Court, Eastern District of Wisconsin and U.S. Court of Appeals, Federal Circuit. Defended patent damages action by manufacturer of loading dock equipment and 25 of its sales representatives in District Court and Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit, substituting for other counsel after liability finding. Succeeded in reducing award substantially on appeal by disallowing lost profits on “associated devices” not embodying the patented technology. Seminal case on the limits of damages obtainable for patent infringement under the Panduit test.
  • Quaker Oats Co. v. QO Chemicals, Inc., 1995 WL 17217909 (N.D. Iowa 1995). U.S. District Court, Northern District of Iowa. Prosecuted counterclaim for injunctive relief based on breach of contract assigning “know-how” and other unpatentable intellectual property relating to the production of furfural (organic chemical) from cereal by-products.
  • Bradner Central Co. v. Federal Ins. Co., 257 Ill.App.3d 466, 628 N.E.2d 1129, (1993). Circuit Court of Cook County, Illinois and Illinois Appellate Court, First District. Defended fidelity bond claim based on alleged “unidentifiable employee theft” of 271 tons of paper from paper converting facility, based solely on inventory comparison evidence. Obtained verdict of zero damages in first trial despite entry of summary judgment on liability. Both rulings were reversed on appeal. Obtained reduced verdict in second trial, then settled on favorable terms.
  • Stamatakis Industries, Inc. v. King, 965 F.2d 469, 1992-1 Trade Cases P 69, 859 (7th Cir. 1992); Frederick King, Hancock Graphics, d/b/a King Graphics Inc. v Stamatakis Industries, Premier Graphics, Alex Stamatakis, Cook County Jury Verdict Reporter published April 22, 1994, Vol. KK. U.S. District Court, Northern District of Illinois; U.S. Court of Appeals, Seventh Circuit; and Circuit Court of Cook County, Illinois. Defeated federal antitrust claim via summary judgment, which was sustained on appeal to the Seventh Circuit, then successfully prosecuted malicious prosecution and breach of contract suit in the Circuit Court for substantial verdict, defeated counterclaim for breach of noncompete agreement.
  • M.O.W. Construction Company v. Schal Associates, Inc./One Magnificent Mile Condominium Association v. Newcastle Properties, Inc., (1992). Circuit Court of Cook County, Illinois. Represented stone installation contractor in complex, multiparty litigation arising from curtain wall leakage in high-profile high-rise construction project. Obtained dismissal of direct claims by condominium association, prosecuted counterclaim for balance of contract price and extra charges, prosecuted third party claim against sub-subcontractor. Settled on favorable terms, with payment to client, after substantial discovery and motion practice.

Presentations

  • “Restrictive Covenant Workshop,” Hinshaw’s Annual Labor & Employment Seminar, Hoffman Estates, Illinois, October 2012.
  •  “Primer on Restrictive Covenants,” Hinshaw’s Annual Labor & Employment Seminar in Hoffman Estates, October 2011.

Education

J.D., University of Michigan School of Law, 1986

B.A., Northwestern University, 1983

Admissions