David M Duree & Assoc

Attorneys, Accident & Property Damage Attorneys, Automobile Accident Attorneys

Be the first to review!

OPEN NOW

Today: 9:00 am - 5:00 pm

Accredited

Business

(618) 628-0186Call Visit WebsiteVisit Website Map & DirectionsDirections312 S Lincoln AveO Fallon, IL 62269 Write a ReviewWrite Review

Is this your business?

Customize this page.

Claim This Business

Hours

Regular Hours

Mon - Fri:	9:00 am - 5:00 pm

Places Near O Fallon with Attorneys

Fairview Heights (7 miles)
Scott Air Force Base (7 miles)
Scott Afb (7 miles)
Lebanon (9 miles)
Belleville (10 miles)
Collinsville (11 miles)
Caseyville (11 miles)
Summerfield (14 miles)

GalleryView all (1)

Gallery Image Number 1

Reviews

Hi there!
Be the first to review!

Click to Rate

Details

Phone: (618) 628-0186

Address: 312 S Lincoln Ave, O Fallon, IL 62269

Website: https://www.dmduree.net/contact

People Also Viewed

View similar Attorneys

Suggest an Edit

David M Duree & Assoc

Wrongful Death
Torts are civil wrongs that occur when one party causes harm to another party. The law office of David M. Duree and Associates, P.C., represents clients who have been injured by defective products or negligent workmanship. We also represent clients who have been sued for wrongful death or personal injury arising from a construction accident.
Fraud
Borrowers brought a putative class action against a mortgage lender alleging that its charges for mortgage assignment recording fees and tax escrow suspension fees violated Illinois consumer protection statutes. The Illinois Supreme Court held that since the lender had complied with applicable banking statutes, including the disclosure requirements of the real estate settlement procedures act, 12 U.S.C. § 2604(c), it did not violate Illinois consumer fraud law, 815 ILCS § 505/1 et. seq. <>Weatherman v. Gary-Wheaton Bank of Fox Valley, N.A., 186 Ill. 2d 472, 239 Ill. Dec. 12, 713 N.E. 2d 543 (Ill. 1999)
Theft
Identity Theft
In the St. Louis area and the state of Missouri, consumer rights attorneys provide vital services to individuals who have been victims of deceptive practices, such as false advertising, credit card fraud, predatory lending, identity theft, and more.
Forgery
Delivering a check to a person who is not the payee of the check, without thoroughly investigating him, does not necessarily constitute negligence under UCC law. The Uniform Commercial Code, R.S.Mo. § 400.3-406, provides that any person who negligently, substantionally, contributes to a material alteration or unauthorized signature is precluded from asserting the alteration, or lack of authority to sign, against a holder in due course or against a drawee. Proximate cause is not an issue, under UCC law. See the Uniform Commercial Code, R.S.Mo. § 400.3-101 to 3-307. Violation of the statute by the paying bank results in liability unless the claiming party negligently contributed to cause the forgery. Uniform Commercial Code, § 400.3-406. Twellman v. Lindell Trust Co., 534 S.W. 2d 83 (Mo. App. 1976)

Business and Corporate Law

Corporate Law
Helping You Establish And Protect Your Business Small businesses are the lifeblood of our economy, but complex legal hurdles can hinder growth potential without an expert legal advisor on your side. From protecting intellectual property rights to providing sound legal advice during litigation or corporate governance, a commercial law attorney is an essential part of […]
Business Formation
There are a number of important steps to take when establishing your business, and each requires experienced legal representation to ensure that the process goes smoothly. We can help you determine which business structure is in your company’s best interest and obtain the necessary licenses and permits required to operate your business in your state.
Business Disputes
A franchiser could enforce its franchise contracts against its franchisees even though the contracts were executed in violation of New York franchise law, (General Business law, sections 680, 683) because the franchiser failed to register with the state before selling the franchises and failed to provide the franchisees with the required Uniform Franchise Offering Circulars. The franchisees had ceased performing the contracts, violated the covenants not to compete and signed similar contracts with a competing franchiser. The court rejected the reasoning of a New York federal court in a similar case. See King Computer v Beeper Plus (S.D.N.Y., 92 Civ 5494, unreported, Lexis 2707, 1993); <>TKO Fleet Enterprises, Inc v Elite Limousine Plus, Inc et al., (Item No. 97) 708 N.Y.S.2d 593,2000 WL 693973, (N.Y.Sup. 5-8-2000)
Construction Contracts
Contract law is one of the most important areas of construction law. Construction contracts are complex documents that detail the rights and obligations of the parties involved in a construction project. Construction law attorney David M. Duree can help you draft, review, and negotiate construction contracts.
Trade Secrets
Intellectual Property
Intellectual Property Law in Illinois You protect your physical property from theft. So when someone threatens your intellectual property — which is often more valuable — you should take steps to protect it, too. However, as new technologies develop faster than ever, intellectual property rights have become harder to defend. If you’re facing issues with […]
Unfair Competition
Intellectual property laws are meant to prevent unfair competition and ensure that others do not profit from your ingenuity and innovative spirit.
Antitrust
The Windfall Defense. A shareholder may not complain of acts of corporate mismanagement if he acquired his shares from those who participated or acquiesced in the allegedly wrongful transaction. This is particularly true where a shareholder purchases all or substantially all the shares of a corporation from the prior shareholders at a fair price, then seeks to have the corporation recover against those prior shareholders for prior corporate mismanagement.<>Bangor Punta Operations, Inc. v. Bangor & Aroostook Railroad, 417 U.S. 703 (1974); REA Express, Inc. v. Private Trouble Damages Antitrust Litigation, 412 F. Supp. 1239 (E.D. Pa. 1976); REA Express, Inc. v. Traveler’s Insurance Co., 406 F. Supp. 1389 (D.D.C. 1976).

Wrongful Termination
A distributor of industrial automation equipment brought an action against the manufacturer for wrongful termination, in violation of the Illinois Franchise Disclosure Act, 815 ILCS 705/1 et seq. The claim was barred by the act’s one year statute of limitations, 815 ILCS 705/27. The one year began to run no later than the distributor’s consultation with his first attorney, who was apparently unaware of the act and did not believe the distributor had grounds to contest the termination. The action was filed immediately after the distributor contacted another attorney, but more one year after the written notice of termination. Brenkman v Belmont Marketing, Inc., 87 Ill.App.3d 1060, 43 Ill.Dec. 500, 410 N.E.2d 500 (Ill.App. 1980) distinguished; <>Pyramid Controls, Inc. v. Siemens Industrial Automation, Inc., (Case No. 98-3310) 172 F.3d 516 (7th Cir. 1999)
Employment Contract
The claims of individual (union member) employees, against the general contractor and project operator, of a subcontractor, which was terminated by the general contractor in a dispute about which would pay for the employees’ break time, were preempted by the National Labor Relations Act, 29 U.S.C. 157, 158. The employees claimed wrongful interference with their employment contracts and intentional infliction of emotional distress. Volentine et al., v. Bechtel, Inc and Mobil Chemical Co., 27 F. Supp.2d 728 (E.D.Tex. 1998)

Construction Litigation
Whether you are a construction business owner or contractor, it can be difficult to keep up with the ever-changing laws and regulations that govern the construction industry. Legal disputes and liabilities may seem like an unavoidable part of your work, but with the help of a skilled construction law attorney, you can save invaluable time, money, and headaches in the long run.
Property Damage
Individuals professional engineers may be held liable to homeowners for negligently inspecting a house, even though the inspection services contract is between the homeowners and the professional engineering corporation which employs the individual engineers. The statutes regulating professional engineering do not permit the individual engineers to escape responsibility for their conduct, and they may not contractually limit their common law and statutory duties. The economic loss rule also does not preclude the homeowners from recovering purely economic losses (there were no personal injuries or property damage) in tort. The economic loss rule is limited to products liability contexts and similar circumstances. <>Moransais v. Heathman et al., 744 So.2d 973 (Fla. 1999)

Personal Injury
For more than 40 years, David M. Duree has provided creative legal solutions to clients with sophisticated legal problems. Whether his case falls under construction and engineering issues, personal injury issues or any number of litigation possibilities, David possesses the rich experience necessary for effective legal counseling. Coupled with his focus on providing hands-on services to his clients, David understands the difficulties his clients face and he knows how to manage those problems on behalf of his clients.
Medical Malpractice
Auto Accidents
Dog Bites

Bankruptcy
A chapter 11 Bankruptcy debtor-Franchisee may assume or reject nonterminated franchise agreements. The debtor-franchisee is not required to cure nonmonetary breaches (the failure to operate for 7 consecutive days) prior to assumption. 11 U.S.C. 365(b)(2)(D). In Re Claremont Acquisition Corporation, 186 B.R. 977 (C.D. Cal. 9-7-1995). When the Bankruptcy petition is filed after notice of termination by the franchisor but before the cure period provided in the franchise agreement, the franchisee may cure monetary breaches at any time before assumption is required, under 11 U.S.C. 365, and is not limited by the contract limits on the time to cure, Moody v. Amoco Oil Co. 734 F.2d 1200 (Case No. 83-2457) (7th Cir. 1984), or the 60 day limit in 11 U.S.C. 108(b). The Bankruptcy Court, however, does have equitable power to extend the time for cure and assumption beyond that permitted in 11 U.S.C. 365. <>In Re Ludlow Hospital Society, Inc v. Secretary of Health and human Services, 124 F.3d 22 (1st Cir. 8-13-1997)
Foreclosure
There is no cause of action for attempted wrongful foreclosure, either under the common law or for violation of banking statutes. Reese v. First Missouri Bank & Trust Co., 736 S.W. 2d 371 (Mo. banc 1987)

View All Services

Provided by