Category: News - Page 2

On January 1, 2026, the Illinois Receivership Act (the Act) takes effect. The Act builds upon a patchwork of laws in Illinois to create a broad framework for creditors and other parties in interest for the appointment of a receiver over most types of real property, personal property and businesses. Here are six important things to know about the Act.

1. A receiver may be appointed as a primary remedy, pre-judgment and post-judgment, in cases involving: (a) lien enforcement where property is at risk of waste or impairment; (b) fraud; (c) a company with deadlocked management; and (d) a company that is insolvent or not paying its debts.

Notably, the Act does not modify a mortgagee’s rights under the Illinois Mortgage Foreclosure Act to seek the appointment of a receiver. Rather, the new Act expands the circumstances under which a receiver can be appointed and formalizes the processes and broadens the powers associated therewith.

2. The court may appoint a receiver without notice if circumstances warrant.

3. Once a receiver is appointed, the court has exclusive jurisdiction: (a) over all receivership property wherever it is located; and (b) over all controversies related to or arising from the receivership and its property.

4. The receiver has broad powers over receivership property, including to: (a) collect, manage and protect it; (b) operate a business by, among other things, incurring debt and paying expenses; (c) assert a claim or defense for the owner; (d) compel a party to produce records and/or be examined under oath; (e) engage professionals such as attorneys and accountants; and (f) transfer it by sale, lease or other disposition.

5. Upon notice from the receiver, creditors are required to timely file a claim against the receivership and if they fail to do so, the claim may be waived.

6. The court may order a receiver’s fees and expenses to be paid from: (a) the receivership property; (b) the person requesting appointment; or (c) a person whose conduct justified the appointment such as the owner.

In sum, Illinois receivers will soon have powers that could benefit secured and unsecured creditors in a variety of tricky situations.

If you have a matter that may warrant the appointment of a receiver, contact Michael W. Debre or another member of Chuhak & Tecson’s Financial Services team.

Client alert authored by Michael W. Debre (312 855 4603), principal.

This Chuhak & Tecson, P.C. communication is intended only to provide information regarding developments in the law and information of general interest. It is not intended to constitute advice regarding legal problems and should not be relied upon as such.

Financial institutions and creditors could face significantly reduced recovery prospects under Public Act 104-120, which takes effect on January 1, 2026. This legislation substantially expands homestead protections for Illinois debtors by amending 735 ILCS 5/12-901 to more than triple the homestead exemption from $15,000 to $50,000 for individual property owners. For co-owned properties, the total exemption increases from $30,000 to $100,000, with each owner’s share proportionate to their ownership percentage.

This amendment creates significant new obstacles for creditors seeking to collect from debtors. Because a home is often a debtor’s most valuable asset, creditors have historically looked to home equity to collect on debts. The homestead exemption prevents creditors from recovering on a homeowner’s equity when the debtor’s equity interest remains below the exemption threshold. Under the previous law, creditors could pursue collection on properties with equity above $15,000. Now, they cannot do so unless the debtor’s equity exceeds $50,000.

The increased exemption applies broadly to single-family homes, condominiums, cooperatives and certain personal property used as a residence. The math is straightforward: a property held in joint tenancy valued at $350,000 with a $250,000 mortgage balance has $100,000 in equity. Under the old law, creditors could force a sale by recording a memorandum of judgment and initiating foreclosure proceedings because the equity exceeded $30,000. The creditor could recover up to $70,000 out of the property. Now, that same equity cannot be used to satisfy a judgment lien because $100,000 is the new threshold. The increased exemption also limits creditor recovery prospects in bankruptcy proceedings, where the expanded protected equity makes distribution from the debtor’s homestead interest far less likely.

Properties that once represented viable collection opportunities may no longer yield any recovery, requiring creditors to reassess their risk models and collection strategies. Financial institutions should begin evaluating their exposure now, implementing updated underwriting criteria and collection procedures to account for this substantially higher exemption threshold.

The lawyers in Chuhak & Tecson’s Financial Services practice group can help you navigate this significant change from updating your collection procedures to developing strategies that protect your interests under the new exemption framework. Contact us to discuss how these changes affect your specific lending and collection practices.

Client alert authored by Nicholas LaCourt (312 855 4344), associate.

Illinois’ pinnacle case on pre-judgment interest statute 735 ILCS 5/2-1303(c) (Section 1303(c)), Cotton v. Coccaro[1], laid pivotal groundwork for parties to seek additional recovery in personal injury and wrongful death claims. The Cotton court affirmed the imposition of pre-judgment interest on plaintiffs $6,528,000.00 medical malpractice verdict and upheld the constitutionality of Section 1303(c) on three bases. First, the court found that Section 1303(c) promotes the jury’s function to accurately calculate damages. Second, it provides compensation for a plaintiff’s delay in being made whole via the passage of time. Third, it promotes a fairer and more even disbursement of damages to successful tort plaintiffs. Illinois courts have recently clarified these concepts in several key respects.

Some advocates have tried to expand Section 1303(c)’s reach in the wake of Cotton. However, Concrete Structures/Sachi, J.V. v. Clark/Bulley/OVC/Power[2] confirms that the concept of interest is fact-specific. Illinois has several separate pre-judgment interest statutes, each of which addresses defined and distinct circumstances. The Concrete court relied on Cotton and its interpretation of Section 1303(c) to ultimately deny plaintiff’s request for pre-judgment interest via the Illinois Public Construction Bond Act[3] and/or Illinois Interest Act[4]. While Concrete echoes the policy concerns raised in Cotton, it refused to expand the reach of Section 1303(c) to breach of contract and unjust enrichment claims which were not contemplated by this statute. Concrete’s refusal to blur the lines between Section 1303(c) and the other Illinois statutes that address interest confirm the importance of its specific and narrow interpretation.

Recent case law also reminds litigants that Section 1303(c) grants Illinois courts discretion to modify both trial verdicts and alternative dispute resolution awards. This is highlighted by the recent Illinois Supreme Court case of Jordan v. Macedo[5], which holds that: (i) one’s failure to seek pre-judgment interest at arbitration does not constitute a waiver of that right; and (ii) application of pre-judgment interest to an arbitration award does not conflict with Supreme Court Rules preventing substantive modifications of arbitration awards. The Jordan decision is based on the fact that Section 1303(c) is procedural in nature as pre-judgment interest is incurred exclusively by the passage of time. Thus, the statute functions as a statutory additur (applicable upon the satisfaction of certain conditions) versus a component of tort damages.

Kroft v. Viper Trans, Inc.[6] takes the reasoning employed through Jordan a step further, holding that application of pre-judgment interest via Section 1303(c) is mandatory where a party intentionally causes delays in personal injury or wrongful death proceedings. In Kroft, the court upheld an award of prejudgment interest under Section 1303(c), including the time after a new trial was granted because the defendant’s willful misconduct (e.g., showing highly prejudicial evidence to the jury) was the root cause of the new trial order. The Kroft decision is punitive in nature and confirms that the plain language of Section 1303(c) remains applicable to all personal injury and wrongful death cases, gamesmanship asid.

The final and most interesting elaboration of Cotton comes via Johnson v. Advoc. Health & Hosps.[7], whichclarifies what kind of settlement offers count under Section 1303(c). In Johnson, the court rejected the parties’ “high-low” settlement structure as a formal “offer” under Section 1303(c) given its conditional nature. Said differently, high-low settlement offers may fail under Section 1303(c) if a verdict falls within a high-low settlement range for which no hard “offer” exists. Under this scenario, any formal settlement offer is moot. However, the Johnson court conceded one key scenario in which high-low settlement offers can work, though left entirely up to chance: where a jury verdict falls outside of the agreed-upon settlement range. Such a verdict formally triggers either the “high” or the “low” offer, which becomes binding upon the parties. The Johnson holding confirms that a “high-low” settlement offer is a risky one that may not effectively thwart the application of prejudgment interest.

These post Cotton decisions reinforce the need to keep a close eye on 735 ILCS 5/2-1303(c) as it evolves. Chuhak & Tecson maintains its dedication to advising its clients and the public on this issue and welcomes the opportunity to answer any corresponding questions.

Client alert authored by Loretto M. Kennedy (312 855 5444), principal and General Counsel and Adrienne M. Arlan (312 855 4315), associate. This Chuhak & Tecson, P.C. communication is intended only to provide information regarding developments in the law and information of general

[1] Cotton v. Coccaro, 468 Ill.Dec. 563 (Ill. 2023).

[2] Concrete Structures/Sachi, J.V. v. Clark/Bulley/OVC/Power, 2024 IL App (1st) 240082, ¶ 1, 7-8, 13 appeal denied, 251 N.E.3d 412 (Ill. 2025).

[3] 30 ILCS 550/2.

[4] 815 ILCS 205/2.

[5] Jordan v. Macedo, 2024 IL App (1st) 230079, ¶¶ 29-32, 244 N.E.3d 341, 349–50, appeal allowed, 244 N.E.3d 250 (Ill. 2024), aff’d in part, rev’d in part, 2025 IL 130687, ¶¶ 29-32.

[6] Kroft v. Viper Trans, Inc., 2025 IL App (1st) 240220, ¶¶ 73-75.

[7] Johnson v. Advoc. Health & Hosps. Corp., 2025 IL App (1st) 230087, ¶¶ 73-89, as modified on denial of reh’g (June 11, 2025), appeal pending (Sep Term 2025).

The Illinois Workplace Transparency Act (WTA) was not exempt from the many laws the Illinois Legislature amended this August 2025. With changes set to take effect on January 1, 2026, employers must heed the new requirements of the WTA which will impact future employment, settlement and severance agreements. Here are five notable changes to the WTA employers should recognize :

The WTA protects employees’ ability to make truthful disclosures about unlawful employment practices. The definition of “unlawful employment practices” was expanded to include disclosures of unlawful practices enforced under the Illinois Department of Labor, Illinois Labor Relations Board, U.S. Department of Labor, Occupational Safety and Health Administration or the National Labor Relations Board.

The WTA explicitly prohibits any contract or agreement that is a condition of employment or continued employment from restricting an employee’s engagement in concerted activity to address work related issues. Any unilateral agreement which prevents concerted activity is automatically void.

The WTA prohibits any contract or agreement that is a condition of employment or continued employment from diminishing an employee’s right to make any claim by shortening the applicable statute of limitations, applying non-Illinois law to an employee’s claim or requiring a venue outside of Illinois to adjudicate an Illinois employee’s claim. Any unilateral agreement that contains these requirements is void.

All settlement or termination agreements which contain a confidentiality clause must contain consideration separate of any consideration offered in exchange for a general release.

In addition to costs and attorneys’ fees for violation of the WTA, employers now also have exposure for consequential damages.

Prior to the new year, employers should review any standard agreements or contracts to ensure they are in compliance with the new requirements under the Workplace Transparency Act.

Client alert authored by Markeya A. Fowler, (312 849 4126), associate.

In August, the Illinois Legislature passed the Family Neonatal Intensive Care Leave Act (Neonatal Care Act), which expands guaranteed and protected unpaid leave available to employees. The Neonatal Care Act grants Illinois employees unpaid leave to care for a child who is a patient in a neonatal intensive care unit (NICU).

The Neonatal Care Act applies to employers with 16 or more employees. The amount of leave that employers must grant to an employee is dependent on the size of the employer. All employers with 16 to 50 employees must provide employees with 10 days of unpaid leave and employers with 51 or more employees must provide up to 20 days of unpaid leave. Employers are not required to provide unpaid leave to independent contractors under the Neonatal Care Act.

Employees who elect to take leave under the Neonatal Care Act can do so continuously or intermittently. Employers are allowed to set minimum leave requirements prohibiting employees from taking leave in less than two-hour increments. While employers may require documentation or reasonable verification of an employee’s length of stay within a NICU, they are prohibited from requesting any documentation that is protected under the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act of 1996 (HIPAA) or any other law.

Employers should take note that unlike many other paid and unpaid leave laws in Illinois, leave under the Neonatal Care Act may be taken in addition to, and upon completion of, leave available under the Family Medical and Leave Act (FMLA). Employers are also prohibited from requiring an employee to use available paid leave instead of taking the leave available under the Neonatal Care Act. However, an employee may choose to use any entitlement for paid or unpaid leave as a substitution for the equivalent amount of leave provided.

Leave under the Neonatal Care Act is protected. Thus, at the conclusion of leave, an employer must reinstate the employee to her/his prior position or an equivalent position without any loss of benefits. Employers are required to maintain the employee’s health insurance similar to the requirements under the FMLA.

Employers are also explicitly prohibited from retaliating against the employee for: (i) exercising the rights guaranteed under the Neonatal Care Act; (ii) opposing practices the employee believes to be in violation of the Neonatal Care Act and; (iii) supporting the right of another to exercise their rights under the Neonatal Care Act. Any employers found in violation of the Neonatal Care Act may be liable for unpaid wages, damages and penalties.

The Neonatal Care Act is effective June 1, 2026, and employers have some time before the new unpaid leave requirement must be provided to eligible employees. However, there were many other changes to employment law this year, including changes to the Victims’ Economic Security and Safety Act, the Nursing Mothers in Workplace Act, and the Military Leave Act. Illinois employers should review and confirm these new legislative amendments and update their policies and procedures as necessary.

Client alert authored by Markeya A. Fowler, (312 849 4126), associate.

Estate planning is often associated with death. However, much of what we do as estate planning attorneys also endeavors to assist our clients in planning during life. Two of the most important estate planning documents that are in fact only effective during a person’s life are a Power of Attorney for Property and a Power of Attorney for Healthcare. Both documents actually cease to hold any power upon a person’s death.

Powers of Attorney are a powerful tool to ensure that if you, for any reason, due to disability or illness whether for a short- or long-term period, are unable to make your own financial or health decisions, someone you trust and have nominated is able to act in your stead as your agent. Without Powers of Attorney in place, a guardianship proceeding may need to be initiated with the Court to allow someone to make financial and health decisions on your behalf if it is determined that you are unable to make these decisions independently. Guardianships are costly, lengthy and are public record and thus largely unfavored by clients and their families.

As an estate planning attorney that specializes in elder law, I often see clients who may have Powers of Attorney, but the Power of Attorney does not have the requisite and specific authorities to allow us to do any proper or protective planning for long-term care and Medicaid benefits. As such, there are times we have to initiate a guardianship proceeding even when Powers of Attorneys exist to obtain the necessary authorities for asset preservation and protection in Medicaid and long-term care planning.

Statutory v. Non-Statutory Powers of Attorney

First, we should distinguish Statutory v. Non-Statutory Powers of Attorney. Statutory Powers of Attorney are defined by the Illinois Power of Attorney Act (755 ILCS 45). As such, they contain statutory provisions and language as well as a set format provided for in the statute. Third parties, such as hospitals and financial institutions, must accept properly executed Statutory Powers of Attorney as valid.

Whereas Non-Statutory Powers of Attorney are drafted in any format and provide for a principal’s intent and nominated agent. It can include limited or non-standard powers. The downside is that third parties are not required to accept Non-Statutory Powers of Attorney because there is no automatic statute protection associated with them.

So often clients ask me, “Can’t I just print the Statutory Power of Attorney form online and sign it?” Unfortunately, while this may work in a pinch, more often than not, I see Statutory Powers of Attorney that are not properly witnessed, notarized or executed and thus not valid. Most importantly for clients, they do not include the necessary additional authorities to allow for long-term care and Medicaid planning.

Additional Statutory Power of Attorney for Property authorities

Oftentimes a person requiring long-term care in a nursing home will require Medicaid benefits to pay for that care. Nursing homes costs can average anywhere from $10,000 to $20,000 monthly in private pay. As such, many cannot sustain private pay for a long period of time and Medicaid benefits will be necessary to pay for nursing home care.

Statutory Powers of Attorney contain automatic authorities that an agent can handle on behalf of a principal, however, there are many authorities that are necessary and helpful for planning for and protecting assets for Medicaid benefits that are not automatically included in a Statutory Power of Attorney. The Statutory Power of Attorney allows for the insertion of additional authorities, but most people, without attorney guidance, default to leaving that section blank and miss the opportunity to enable their agents with advantageous authorities.

Some additional authorities that are helpful for Medicaid and long-term care planning include gifting, trust creation, establishing annuities, transfers to spouses in addition to a host of others that encompass and empower an agent with the necessary authorities to protect and preserve your assets to the greatest extent possible to qualify for Medicaid. Without these additional authorities, there is often little to nothing that an agent can legally do within the scope of the Statutory Power of Attorney in situations where a person requires Medicaid for long-term care but has some assets to protect and/or preserve.

Conclusion

Estate planning is for life and not just death. Further, there is no “one size fits all” for estate planning documents, including Powers of Attorney. It is important to meet with a qualified elder law attorney to discuss your Powers of Attorney and estate planning documents to ensure that they are tailored to your needs, including inclusion of ancillary authorities to empower your Power of Attorney agent to act for you.

Client alert authored by Christine A. Barone (312 855 4348), principal.

In acknowledging Estate Planning Awareness Week, October 20 – 25, 2025, Agnes Ptasznik, estate planning attorney at Chuhak & Tecson, P.C., explains something that does not always get enough attention. Why it is so important for single people to have an estate plan.

Even if you are not married, you probably have people you care deeply about, maybe a partner, close friends or family members. An estate plan ensures that you decide who will inherit your assets. Without one, state intestacy laws take over and those default rules may not reflect your wishes.

For example, if you are in a committed relationship, but not legally married, your partner would not automatically receive anything under the law and will not receive anything at all unless you have specifically named them as a beneficiary on an account or policy or provided for them in your estate plan.

And if you do not have a partner, estate planning is just as important. It allows you to decide who should receive your property, such as siblings, nieces or nephews, friends or charities that matter to you, instead of leaving those decisions to state law.

Estate planning is not just about “who gets what.” It is about protecting yourself, your loved ones and the causes that reflect your values — ensuring that your wishes, not the state’s rules, guide what happens next.

If you have not started yet, reach out to an experienced estate planning attorney here at Chuhak & Tecson, someone who can help you put the right plan in place for your situation. It is one of the most thoughtful gifts you can give yourself — and the people you care about.

Client alert authored by Agnes A. Ptasznik (312 849 4139), associate.

On September 24, 2025, almost 200 business leaders, entrepreneurs and strategic partners gathered together at Rivers in Chicago to connect with friends and colleagues old and new and support a wonderful and impactful cause. The occasion was the 22^nd Mix-and-Mingle event for Chuhak & Tecson’s award-winning Women Helping Women program. This groundbreaking initiative has fostered professional empowerment and strengthened bonds among professionals while partnering with nonprofit organizations to provide resources and expand opportunities for women in need throughout Chicagoland.

At this year’s event, Women Helping Women welcomed its latest nonprofit partner, The Period Collective. Grounded in the belief that menstrual equity is a fundamental human right, this Chicago-based 501(c)(3) organization strives to create a world where everyone has access to menstrual products, regardless of their income or living situation. To that end, The Period Collective collects and provides menstrual products to local shelters, transitional housing facilities, schools and food banks. Since its inception, the organization has distributed more than 3.3 million menstrual products to a range of social service organizations. Having access to these essential products allows women and girls to manage monthly stresses with more comfort, ease and security.

The guests who gathered at this year’s Mix-and-Mingle contributed over 500 boxes, bags and individual menstrual products and almost $2,600 in cash donations — all to support deserving women.

Ida Melbye, executive director of The Period Collective, was both thrilled by the success of the event and grateful for the overwhelming support shown by Chuhak & Tecson and those in attendance.

“We are honored that The Period Collective was chosen as this year’s beneficiary,” Melbye says. “Thanks to the overwhelming generosity of donors and attendees, we will be able to provide essential menstrual products to individuals in need throughout our community. This support ensures that more people can attend school, go to work and participate fully in daily life without interruption or shame. We are grateful to this incredible group of professionals for recognizing the vital role menstrual equity plays in ensuring educational and economic opportunities for all. The Women Helping Women event is a powerful reminder of what’s possible when we all come together with purpose.”

Over the past 17 years, Women Helping Women has brought together thousands of local attorneys, business leaders, entrepreneurs, decision-makers and strategic partners at its annual Mix-and-Mingle gathering. Over delicious food and drink (including the bespoke “Don’t Cramp My Style” cocktail created for the event), these accomplished professionals forge bonds, exchange ideas, generate new business and share laughter and conversation, all while bringing hope, assistance and opportunities for women facing an array of personal and economic challenges.

Chuhak & Tecson principal Mallory Moreno, leader of the firm’s Elder Law practice and an active participant in the Women Helping Women program, says it was a privilege to help bring more resources and awareness to The Period Collective and its important work.

“Being part of an event where women come together not only to elevate each other but also to uplift those in need is nothing short of inspiring,” Moreno says. “Our partnership with The Period Collective underscores the immense power we hold when strong and driven individuals join forces to address challenges that affect women across the globe. Menstrual poverty is an issue that many face in silence, but by empowering ourselves to help women, we are breaking that silence and making a tangible difference.”

Attendees echoed Moreno’s ecstatic feelings about the Mix-and-Mingle event and took similar joy in the opportunity to connect and give back to the community:

“I just wanted to tell you what a fun, wonderful evening I had tonight at the Women Helping Women event!! The turnout was wonderful, the cause was special and important and so many people, me included, stayed past the end of the event to continue talking and connecting.”
“I’m so grateful you extended an invitation to join the Women Helping Women event last night! It was energizing to say the least. My type of night!”
“The charity supported last night – The Period Collective – is quite apropos for Women Helping Women.”
“It was particularly great to connect with new friends. I very much appreciate your intentional introductions.”
“It looks like your partnership with The Period Collective was a success, and I can’t wait to see the impact you make in 2026!”
“Such a great event. Thanks also for making all those connections!”

“Thank you so much for inviting us and for hosting tonight. It was a great evening! We had such a wonderful time, and The Period Collective is a fantastic cause.”
“What a beautiful evening of connection and giving back. I truly enjoyed every part of the event and the wonderful conversations I had. Thank you so much for inviting me!”

For its creative, integrated approach to professional growth and community service, Women Helping Women was previously honored with an IDEA award from the Association of Legal Administrators, which recognizes new practices that deliver great value and transformational impact through innovative achievement.

To learn more about Women Helping Women, or to suggest a nonprofit partner for upcoming events, contact Sydney Iglitzen, Manager of Marketing & Communications, at 312.201.3437 or siglitzen@chuhak.com.

Lindsey Paige Markus, shareholder and leader of Chuhak & Tecson, P.C.’s 25-attorney Estate Planning & Asset Protection practice, presented a timely and significant program titled ”Estate Tax Planning: The topic no one wants to address…but we can’t afford not to!” on September 26, to the Financial Planning Association’s 2025 Annual Conference at Morningstar, 22 W Washington Street, Chicago. Markus addressed the importance of talking about the topic of estate tax planning with one’s family sooner rather than later. With rising asset values, changing tax laws, increasing complexity in wealth transfer and an Illinois exemption of only $4 million, proactive planning has never been more critical. Markus provided insights into minimizing tax exposure, leveraging gifting strategies and preparing for legislative changes. Often uncomfortable but essential to discuss, she stressed the realities of estate taxes and the need for strategic approaches to preserving wealth for future generations. She cautioned, though uncomfortable, silence can be costly!

Chuhak & Tecson congratulates Missy Turk Firmage, principal in the Estate & Trust Administration & Litigation practice, who has been honored as one of the “40 Illinois Attorneys Under 40 to Watch” by Law Bulletin Media. The award recognizes excellence, talent and successful attorneys from across the state.

Missy focuses her practice on contested and routine guardianship matters, estate and trust litigation and administration, breach of fiduciary duty claims and fiduciary defense, elder law and trust and estate-related appellate work.

Her colleagues describe her as a passionate advocate for her clients. “Missy is a brilliant attorney,” said Rachael Gould, national head of the guardian and special needs trust administration with BMO. “She is a fabulous litigator. She is insightful, creative and compassionate.”

Missy received the Chicago Bar Foundation 2025 Maurice Weigle Exceptional Young Lawyer Award celebrating the initiative, commitment and exceptional contributions of young lawyers to the profession, the organized bar and the community. Also in 2025, Missy was named to the Chicago Volunteer Legal Service (CVLS) Honor Roll in recognition of her commitment to pro bono work. She currently serves as a junior board member of CVLS, an organization founded more than five decades ago that provides pro bono civil legal aid services in the Chicago area.

Meg Benson, executive director of CVLS said, “When it comes to community service and pro bono, Missy walks the walk. What really sets Missy apart and makes her truly unique and exceptional is the compassion she brings to these cases …. Her dedication to her work and clients have endeared her to CVLS, her colleagues in the Probate Division and to the Court.” Benson remarked, “Admired throughout the Probate Division for her skill and kindness, Missy is an extraordinary attorney and generous, effective champion of our legal profession.”

As a passionate and dedicated child welfare advocate, she serves youth in foster care as associate board vice president for Court Appointed Special Advocates, an organization she has been involved in for over a decade. Missy also serves as a guardian ad litem for children in problematic or contested minor guardianship cases where her compassion is exceeded only by her tenacity for advocating for the best interests of her child-clients.

Mitch Weinstein, president of the firm, announced the 2025 – 2026 appointment of Missy as the firm’s pro bono publico chairperson. The chairperson implements the firm’s pro bono publico policy, tracking among other things, the firm’s pro bono hours and opportunities to serve. On appointing Missy, Weinstein said, “We are proud of Missy and know that she will be an extraordinary leader of our pro bono publico efforts.”