This section contains the nature of the case and procedural background.

P was hired as an associate attorney of D. P discovered that the firm was filing consumer debt collection actions in violation of the venue provisions of the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act (15 U.S.C. § 1692i(a)(2)(B) (1988)) and the Illinois Collection Agency Act ( 225 ILCS 425/9(20) (West 1994)). P spoke with one of the firm's principal partners, regarding the filing practice and was advised that the matter would be remedied. P was given the responsibility of reviewing and signing all complaints filed by the firm in consumer debt collection cases. P learned that D continued to file actions in violation of the venue provisions. P again spoke with one of the firm's principal partners and was assured that the practice would be corrected. P was relieved of the responsibility to review and sign complaints in consumer debt collection cases. Three months later, P discovered that the firm had not ceased the practice. P complained again. Two weeks later, P was terminated. P sued D for wrongful discharge. D filed a motion to dismiss in that Illinois courts have refused to extend the tort of retaliatory discharge to employees who are licensed attorneys. The circuit court and the appellate court denied D's motion to dismiss. D appealed.

The legal issues presented in this case will be displayed here.

The court's holding and decision will be displayed here.

Legal analysis from Dean's Law Dictionary will be displayed here.