ILLINOIS FAMILY MILITARY LEAVE ACT - Mark P. Loftus

September 26, 2025

Saw an interesting article in the CBA Record by James F. Costello Jr., the Veteran’s Rights Project Coordinator at the Legal Assistance Foundation of Metropolitan Chicago. Costello’s article discussed the Illinois Family Military Leave Act[The Act]. The Act is fairly new, having just become effective in 2005. The purpose of the Act is to afford leave to employees who wish to visit with spouses or children who have been called into military duty. The article is an excellent primer on the Act. Some of the important points made by Costello include:
1) Leave is extended only to the spouse or parent of a person called to military service lasting longer than 30 days;
2) Only employers with 15 or more employees are covered;
3) The Act extends only to those employees who have worked at least 1,250 hours in the preceding 12 months;
4) Employers with 15-50 employees are required to provide up to 15 days of leave to the employee;
5) Employers with more than 50 employees are required to provide 30 days of leave;
6) The leave is UNPAID;
7) Eligible employees seeking to utilize the leave must give advance notice to the employer[oral notice is acceptable];
8) Upon return from leave, the employee shall be restored to his/her previous position, or to an equivalent position;
9) Employers are prohibited from discharging, fining, suspending or in any other way interfering with the employee’s right to utilize the leave;
10) Individuals may enforce their rights under the Act by filing suit in the Circuit Court. The only enforcement mechanism however, is injunctive or equitable relief. The Act does not provide for damages.

The Act, as pointed out by Costello, is particularly timely. The Illinois National Guard is presently in the midst of its largest deployment since World War II, with nearly 3000 soldiers scheduled for deployment to Afghanistan to assist with the growing insurgency.

Red Tesla sedan driving on a road.
September 26, 2025
According to online reports, Tesla ignored a $60 million dollar settlement overture in the wrongful death case that ultimately resulted in a $242 million dollar jury verdict against the car maker. The lawsuit grew out of 2019 crash where a Tesla Model S with Autopilot engaged, plowed through a Florida intersection and crashed into a Chevy Tahoe. Neima Benavides Leon and her boyfriend, Dillon Angulo were standing near the Tahoe when the Tesla crashed into it. Leon was killed and Angulo suffered serious injuries. A lawsuit was filed against Tesla, asserting that although the Autopilot feature was engaged, the vehicle did not brake. Florida law permits a monetary demand to be issued before trial. If the defendant fails to accept the demand within 30 days it is considered rejected. If the plaintiff then goes to trial and secures a verdict 25% greater than the offer, the defendant is on the hook for plaintiff’s investigative expenses and attorneys’ fees. Tesla is appealing the jury verdict, citing “substantial errors of law and irregularities at trial.”.
Johnson's baby powder container, white bottle, blue text, red seal, 400g.
September 26, 2025
This important ruling got kind of lost in the news cycle. A couple weeks ago, the United States Supreme Court refused to vacate a $2.2 billion dollar ovarian cancer verdict against Johnson & Johnson[“J & J”]. The verdict was originally returned by a Missouri jury in 2018 on behalf of 22 women. The original verdict was actually $4.7 billion but a Missouri Appellate Court reduced the award to $2 billion. Each of the women claimed that there was asbestos and asbestos-laced talc in J & J talcum powder products they used, and they developed ovarian cancer as a result. Asbestos is known to cause cancer. Talc, in its raw form is often found in close proximity to naturally occurring asbestos. When J & J mined talc, that talc sometimes contained asbestos. And that asbestos sometimes found its way into J & J personal hygiene products. [In 2019, J & J recalled 33,000 bottles of J & J products after FDA testing found asbestos in test samples]. J & J, has known of the risk of asbestos contamination in talc products since the 1970’s. Some 21,000 plus ovarian cancer cases are pending against J & J throughout the United States.
Movie poster for
September 26, 2025
Reports today say that DuPont and the State of New Jersey have reached a $2 Billion dollar settlement arising out of DuPont’s release of “forever chemicals” into soil, wetlands and other areas in New Jersey – and then forgetting to clean up the mess they made. The settlement with DuPont is reportedly the largest environmental settlement ever obtained by a state. “Forever chemicals” – also known as PFAS(referring to per and polyfluoroalkyl substances) are man-made chemicals that are used in an extensive variety of products as they are both water and grease-resistant. The chemicals are linked to litany of health problems, including increased risk of certain cancers(kidney, testicular and breast) liver damage, thyroid issues and reproductive problems(such as decreased fertility, low birthweight and developmental problems). NJ.Com is reporting that one of the sites where DuPont created munitions created such significant contamination in the environment that over 300 homes required filters to prevent toxic chemicals from seeping into their homes. The settlement terms provide that DuPont will spend $875 millions cleaning up the contamination and set aside another $125 million to cover other damages that may arise. Additionally, DuPont will also set p a $1.2 billion funding source and reserve fund of $475 million to ensure that even if the company fails to make payments, or goes bankrupt, public funds will not be used. For a stark introduction into the nature of PFAS, check out Dark Waters, a compelling and criminally underrated movie based on the decades old fight waged by attorney Robert Bilott against DuPont for contaminating West Virginia rural communities.