Heyl, Royster, Voelker & Allen Professional CorporationOf Counsel

no photo

About Richard Thomas Sikes, Jr.

Richard Thomas Sikes, Jr. is a lawyer practicing appellate advocacy, civil rights litigation/section 1983, railroad litigation and 4 other areas of law. Richard received a Bachelor of Business Administration degree from Marquette University in 1976, and has been licensed for 46 years. Richard practices at Heyl, Royster, Voelker & Allen Professional Corporation in Chicago, IL.

 

Awards

Reviews for Richard

This lawyer does not have any client reviews on Lawyers.com yet

Write a Review

Services

Areas of Law

  • Intellectual Property
  • Other 6
    • Appellate Advocacy
    • Civil Rights Litigation/Section 1983
    • Railroad Litigation
    • Lawsuits & Disputes
    • Occupational Disease
    • Defective and Dangerous Products

Practice Details

  • Firm Information
    Position
    Of Counsel
    Firm Name
    Heyl, Royster, Voelker & Allen Professional Corporation
  • Representative Cases & Transactions
    Cases
    Significant Cases: Kreps, Special Representative of the Estate of Arenz v. BNSF: (2018) Represented BNSF Railway Company in the Circuit Court of McDonough Co., IL
    the Appellate Court of Illinois, Third District in a FELA case. The trial court granted summary judgment for the railroad
    the appellate court affirmed. Before that, the defense was successful at having the lawsuit transferred to McDonough County on a contested motion to transfer for intra-state forum non conveniens . Plaintiff claimed he sustained severe
    permanent injuries to his foot, shoulder,
    body while stepping off a railroad truck during work. Plaintiff's complaint alleged that ... defendant failed to provide plaintiff with a safe place to work by having large rocks or debris in the yard compound which prevented plaintiff from having secure footing while exiting the truck. The plaintiff's supervisor's report taken on the day of the alleged injury disclosed that [Plaintiff] says he didn't step on anything or twist his ankle, only he had a sharp pain which caused his right foot to give way .... . The defense presented additional evidence from witnesses
    treating physicians that showed a complete lack of evidence that supported the plaintiff's theory that he was injured in whole or in part because he stepped on a large rock
    that he had not stepped on any rock at all. In granting summary judgment, the trial court noted there was no evidence that there were large rocks in the yard, nor that that an illusory large rock caused (Plaintiff's) injury. The defense also proved that there was no causal relationship between the incident
    the plaintiff's claimed shoulder
    body injuries. In affirming the trial court, the appellate court ruled that ... plaintiff failed to establish a question of material fact concerning defendant's negligence in not using reasonable care to ensure plaintiff a safe work environment.
    In Re Matteson Marine: 2012 WL 7110565 (2012), U.S. District Court, Central District of Illinois, Rock Isl
    (2012) Represented BNSF Railway Company as co-counsel with Heyl Royster in a case tried before the court sitting in admiralty involving damages occurred when a river barge struck the client's railroad bridge. In its published opinion, the court noted, ...the exemplary quality of the legal representation of the parties in this case. The attorneys were always completely prepared
    presented the evidence in a wholly professional manner. While aggressively advocating on behalf of their clients, counsel pursued their advocacy in a highly civil manner. The court awarded damages to BNSF in excess of $690,000.
    BNSF Railway Company v. ABC-NACO: Circuit Court of Cook Co., IL (2009) Represented BNSF Railway Company as lead counsel in a three-week product liability trial involving a multimillion dollar claim against the manufacturer of a railroad car part that caused a catastrophic 26-car derailment. After BNSF recovered a large amount in settlement with two defendants, the case was tried against ABC-NACO to a $4.4 million verdict in favor of BNSF. Also served as lead counsel for BNSF on appeal in which the court considered numerous issues including: choice of law (Arizona or Illinois), sufficiency of the proof of a product defect, foreseeability of an intervening cause, admissibility of expert testimony, preservation of evidence, adequacy of the jury instructions
    the effect of a prior court order dismissing claims of other defendants pursuant to a settlement. The appellate court held that the judgment was satisfied by the prior settlement with other defendants, but otherwise affirmed the jury's verdict. Burlington Northern v. ABC-NACO, 389 Ill.App.3d 691, 906 N.E.2d 83 (1st Dist. 2009).
    Soo Line Railroad Company v. Illinois Tollway Authority: 2016 WL 1215372 (2017) Represented the Canadian Pacific Railway (CP) in a dispute with the Illinois Tollway Authority about the Tollway's plans to build a new toll road through
    under CP's Bensenville Yard. CP's suit in the United States District Court for the Northern District of Illinois sought declaratory judgment that the Tollway's attempt to condemn large swaths of CP's yard under state law is pre-empted by the federal Interstate Commerce Commission Termination Act (ICCTA). The matter is stayed before the Seventh Circuit while the suit is before the federal Surface Transportation Board for resolution.
    Roth v. Norfalco: Middle District of Pennsylvania (2006) Represented the seller
    shipper of sulfuric acid in a claim brought against it by an employee at a paper mill who was seriously burned by acid when attempting to unload the client's tank car. The trial court granted the defendant/client's motion for summary judgment, finding that the plaintiffs' claims that the railroad car was defective were preempted by the federal Hazardous Materials Transportation Act, 49 U.S.C. 5101-5128. The decision was affirmed on appeal in Roth v. Norfalco, 651 F.3d 367 (3rd Cir. 2011).
    Schultz v. Metra: 201 Ill.2d 260, 775 N.E.2d 964 (2002) Represented Metra as co-lead counsel on appeal. The main issue before the Illinois Supreme Court was the propriety of using the Illinois Pattern Jury Damages Instruction on pre-existing conditions in a case brought under the Federal Employer's Liability Act, 45 U.S.C. 51 et seq. where controlling federal substantive law differs from state law on the definition of a pre-existing condition. The court held that the pattern jury instruction on pre-existing condition was erroneous.
    People of the State of Illinois v. Vulcan Materials, Inc.: Circuit Court of Cook County (2010) Represented the State of Illinois
    the Illinois Department of Transportation in a suit against Vulcan Materials, Inc. involving the State's claim that the defendant permanently damaged a one-mile section of historic Route 66, in McCook, Illinois, when over many years it mined rock in its limestone quarry too close to the road. The matter was significant due the public interest that the case generated,
    the fascinating historical, engineering,
    legal issues involved. Opposing counsel were Dan Webb
    Scott Szala of Winston & Strawn. After protracted litigation, the case settled in favor of the State in the amount of $40 million.
    CSX et al. v. Combustion Engineering, et al.: U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Michigan (1992) Represented the Atchison, Topeka & Santa Fe Railroad in claims against the designers, manufacturers
    shippers of a large component located on a railroad flat car, for damages
    losses sustained when the railroad car derailed, causing a fire
    ten square-mile evacuation near Freel
    , Michigan on July 22, 1989. After 10 years of litigation, including a binding arbitration hearing, obtained a full recovery for Santa Fe for all claims paid.
    Vodak et al., v. City of Chicago, et al.,: U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Illinois (2003) Represented the City of Chicago
    numerous Chicago Police Comm
    ers
    Officers in a class action brought by all people detained or arrested by Chicago Police officers during anti-war protests at the commencement of the Iraq War in 2003. Participated as lead trial counsel in discovery
    preparation of a motion for summary judgment that was granted, dismissing all defendants. The trial court's decision is reported at 623 F.Supp.2d 933 (N.D. Ill. 2009).
    People v. Roush: 101 Ill.2d 355 (1984) Represented the People of the State of Illinois Lead counsel on brief
    in oral argument regarding an order of the Circuit Court of Cook County holding the Illinois Department of Mental Health
    Developmental Disabilities in contempt of court for failing to prevent patients found not guilty by reason of insanity from escaping from its facilities. The Supreme Court upheld the appellate court's reversal of the circuit court's order.
    People v. Simmons: 93 Ill.2d 94 (1982) Represented the People of the State of Illinois as lead counsel on brief
    in oral argument in an appeal from convictions for involuntary manslaughter
    armed violence.
    People v. Eddmonds: 101 Ill.2d 44 (1984) Represented the People of the State of Illinois as lead counsel on brief
    in oral argument in appeal from a murder conviction
    imposition of death penalty. The court affirmed the conviction
    death sentence.
    Rundquist v. BNSF Railway Co.: Circuit Court for the Ninth Judicial Circuit, Knox Co., IL (2012) Represented BNSF Railway at trial in an injury claim brought under the Federal Employer's Liability Act. The jury returned a defense verdict.
    Aldis v. City of Chicago: Northern District of Illinois (2013) Defended City of Chicago
    Chicago Police officers at trial in civil rights claim. The jury returned a defense verdict.
    Aldridge v. Haggerty: Northern District of Illinois (2013) Defended City of Chicago
    Chicago Police officers at trial in civil rights claim. The jury returned a defense verdict.
    Ciezki v. City of Chicago: Northern District of Illinois (2013) Defended City of Chicago
    Chicago Police officers at trial in civil rights claim. The jury returned a defense verdict.
    Preston v. City of Chicago: Northern District of Illinois (2014) Defended City of Chicago
    Chicago Police officers at trial in civil rights claim. The jury returned a defense verdict.
    Wright v. City of Chicago: Northern District of Illinois (2014) Defended City of Chicago
    Chicago Police officers in a bench trial in civil rights claim. The judge returned a defense verdict.
    Multiple Plaintiffs v. Burge: (2003-11) Represented defendants in notorious civil rights claims involving allegations of torture
    forced confessions by the Midnight Crew at Area 2 Chicago Police Headquarters.

Experience

  • Bar Admission & Memberships
    Admissions
    1980, Illinois
    Pro Hac Vice in Wisconsin, Michigan, Oregon, Washington, Indiana, Pennsylvania
    State Courts of Minnesota
    United States Court of Appeals, 7th Circuit
    United States District Court, Central District of Illinois
    United States District Court, Eastern District of Michigan
    United States District Court, Middle District of Pennsylvania
    United States District Court, Northern District of Illinois
    Memberships

    Professional Associations

    •National Association of Railroad Trial Counsel

  • Education & Certifications
    Law School
    DePaul University College of Law
    Class of 1980
    Juris Doctor
    Other Education
    Marquette University
    Class of 1976
    Bachelor of Business Administration

Richard Thomas Sikes, Jr.

Of Counsel at Heyl, Royster, Voelker & Allen Professional Corporation
Not yet reviewed

33 N Dearborn Street, 7th FloorChicago, IL 60602U.S.A.

Show on map

Lawyers Nearby

Andrew Stephen Kryder, Esq.
Pro
Andrew Stephen Kryder, Esq.
5.0
General Practice lawyer

Free Consultation

David Rapoport
Pro
David Rapoport
5.0
General Practice lawyer

Free Consultation

Peter Ordower
Pro
Peter Ordower
5.0
General Practice lawyer

Free Consultation

John Dearden Donlevy
Pro
John Dearden Donlevy
5.0
General Practice lawyer
Andrew Stephen Kryder, Esq.
Pro
Andrew Stephen Kryder, Esq.
5.0
General Practice lawyer

Free Consultation

Case type is required.
I am is required.
First name is required.
Last name is required.
A valid zip code is required.
Country is required.
State is required.
A valid city is required.
A valid email address is required.
A valid phone number is required.
Message is required.
0/1000 characters

By clicking the Submit button, you agree to the Terms of Use, Supplemental Terms and Privacy Policy. You also consent to be contacted at the phone number you provided, including by autodials, text messages and/or pre-recorded calls, from Lawyers.com and its affiliates and from or on behalf of attorneys you request or contact through this site. Consent is not a condition of purchase.

You should not send any sensitive or confidential information through this site. Emails sent through this site do not create an attorney-client relationship and may not be treated as privileged or confidential. The lawyer or law firm you are contacting is not required to, and may choose not to, accept you as a client. The internet is not necessarily secure and emails sent though this site could be intercepted or read by third parties.

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA. See Google’s Privacy Policy and Terms of Service.

Thank you! Your message has been successfully sent.

For your records, a copy of this email has been sent to test@test.com.

Summary of Your Message
Case Type:
I am a/an:
First Name:
Last Name:
City:
Zip Code or Postal Code:
State:
Country:
Phone Number:
Message: