2019 IL App (1st) 181703 FIRST DISTRICT SIXTH DIVISION May 24, 2019 No. 1-18-1703 ELHAM SHEIKHOLESLAM, ) Appeal from the ) Circuit Court of Plaintiff-Appellant, ) Cook County. ) v. ) No. 18 L 2164 ) ANTONIN FAVREAU, ) Honorable ) Daniel T. Gillespie, Defendant-Appellee. ) Judge Presiding. JUSTICE HARRIS delivered the judgment of the court, with opinion. Justices Cunningham and Connors concurred in the judgment and opinion. OPINION ¶1 This appeal arises from an action for fraud and legal malpractice, brought by plaintiff Elham Sheikholeslam against defendant Antonin Favreau. Defendant filed a motion to dismiss for lack of personal jurisdiction, which the trial court granted upon the documentary evidence submitted by the parties. On appeal, plaintiff contends that the trial court erred in finding that it lacked personal jurisdiction over defendant because defendant could have performed the contract only because he had a license to practice law in Illinois and because defendant had continuous and systematic business contacts with Illinois. For the reasons stated below, we affirm. ¶2 I. JURISDICTION ¶3 The circuit court found that it lacked personal jurisdiction over the sole defendant and dismissed this case with prejudice on July 12, 2018. Plaintiff timely filed her notice of appeal on August 7, 2018. Accordingly, this court has jurisdiction pursuant to article VI, section 6, of the No. 1-18-1703 Illinois Constitution and Illinois Supreme Court Rule 301 (eff. Feb. 1, 1994), governing appeals from a final judgment in a civil case. Ill. Const. 1970, art. VI, § 6. ¶4 II. BACKGROUND ¶5 Plaintiff filed her complaint in February 2018, naming Favreau as the sole defendant. She alleged regarding jurisdiction that defendant conducted business transactions in Illinois, made or performed a contract substantially connected with Illinois, or breached his fiduciary duty to plaintiff as an Illinois-licensed attorney. Regarding venue, plaintiff alleged that defendant was a nonresident of Illinois. Plaintiff alleged that she employed defendant in March 2016 to represent her in a federal immigration matter upon his representation at that time that he was “an Illinois- licensed attorney and [was] thereby an authorized immigration attorney within the United States.” She claimed fraud upon allegations that, in August 2016, he made certain knowingly false representations to her that she relied upon to her detriment. She claimed legal malpractice upon allegations that defendant overcharged her for her immigration matter and employed a nonattorney to provide legal advice and service on plaintiff’s matter without attorney supervision. ¶6 In April 2018, defendant filed his appearance and motion to dismiss (735 ILCS 5/2-619.1 (West 2016)), arguing, in relevant part, that the circuit court lacked personal jurisdiction over him. He argued that the complaint failed to allege sufficient facts to confer personal jurisdiction over him and that his attached affidavit established a lack of sufficient contacts with Illinois to confer personal jurisdiction over him. He argued that plaintiff’s allegations of personal jurisdiction were “boilerplate and conclusory.” He also argued that being licensed to practice law in Illinois does not by itself confer personal jurisdiction to ...
Original document
Source: All recent Immigration Decisions In All the U.S. Courts of Appeals